Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Repackaging Wingers


"Winston_Smith" wrote in message
...
Hawke wrote:

There is no doubt that the tone around here is not very civil these
days. So what is causing it? I think it has to do with the Democrats
being in power and most of the guys in here are strongly right wing in
their politics. The fact that they lost the last election and their side
is now pretty much powerless has them very ****ed off. They don't get to
call the shots anymore and to make things worse Obama is doing things
exactly the opposite of how they would do them.


More troops for all the wars.


But...but...the wingers were *for* the wars!

Guantanamo still open.


Wingers LOVE Guantanamo, and want to keep it open!

More raids on the treasury to pay off the banksters.


NO! The banksters raided the Treasury under the last president. They haven't
gotten more than the initial $700 billion since. (In fact, I saw the
estimate today that the cost to us was actually $117 billion, of which Obama
is trying to recover $90 billion).

Increase the debt limit some more.


That's the price of a stimulus. If you aren't going to run a stimulus
deficit in a downturn -- all presidents have since the 1930s, including
Reagan -- what in the hell is your magic solution to a declining economy and
rising unemployment? Cut taxes? ggg

Ignore open borders.


Hell, we've ignored them under five or six presidents. If a Republican won't
do it, why do you expect a Democrat to do it?

Exclude the other party from deliberations.


Oh, that's supposed to be something new?


Yeah, right, big change. George Walker 0bama is in his third term.


He didn't start the polarization. And he isn't going to let the Republicans
exploit his efforts so they can push a minority agenda. No one in his right
mind would do so.


My prediction is that
they will keep it up until another right winger is elected president.


Is it fair to say another left winger has been elected president?


No, it's a foolish thing to say.


Where is the difference?


An effort to reform health care; to bring Guantanamo prisoners into the US
prison system; and to regulate non-bank-banks and to re-regulate commercial
bank/investment bank combinations.

And what have the Republicans done? Resisted every step of the way, with the
help of a few conservative Democrats.

This Congress sucks worse than most, and the Democrats in Congress suck
plenty. But the irrational, ideological and political resistance to some
needed changes goes beyond stupidity. It's reprehensible politicization of
the country's well-being. The stupidity of it is beyond belief.

--
Ed Huntress


  #2   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 852
Default Repackaging Wingers

On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:59:39 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


An effort to reform health care; to bring Guantanamo prisoners into the US
prison system; and to regulate non-bank-banks and to re-regulate commercial
bank/investment bank combinations.

And what have the Republicans done? Resisted every step of the way, with the
help of a few conservative Democrats.

This Congress sucks worse than most, and the Democrats in Congress suck
plenty. But the irrational, ideological and political resistance to some
needed changes goes beyond stupidity. It's reprehensible politicization of
the country's well-being. The stupidity of it is beyond belief.



America, the land of the free, where anything/one can be bought for enough
money ;-)


Mark Rand
RTFM
  #3   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Repackaging Wingers


"Mark Rand" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:59:39 -0500, "Ed Huntress"

wrote:


An effort to reform health care; to bring Guantanamo prisoners into the US
prison system; and to regulate non-bank-banks and to re-regulate
commercial
bank/investment bank combinations.

And what have the Republicans done? Resisted every step of the way, with
the
help of a few conservative Democrats.

This Congress sucks worse than most, and the Democrats in Congress suck
plenty. But the irrational, ideological and political resistance to some
needed changes goes beyond stupidity. It's reprehensible politicization of
the country's well-being. The stupidity of it is beyond belief.



America, the land of the free, where anything/one can be bought for enough
money ;-)


Mark Rand
RTFM


Well, pard', the Supreme Court made it official today: Businesses and unions
can spend as much as they want to for political campaigns, advertising, and
so on. Any Congressman who makes a deal with them now can write his own
ticket.

We're for sale! How much money ya' got? We're not cheap, but the view is
great. You can see Russia from here!

--
Ed Huntress


  #4   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
Von Von is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2
Default Repackaging Wingers

"Ed Huntress" wrote in
:


"Mark Rand" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:59:39 -0500, "Ed Huntress"

wrote:


An effort to reform health care; to bring Guantanamo prisoners
into the US prison system; and to regulate non-bank-banks and to
re-regulate commercial
bank/investment bank combinations.

And what have the Republicans done? Resisted every step of the
way, with the
help of a few conservative Democrats.

This Congress sucks worse than most, and the Democrats in
Congress suck plenty. But the irrational, ideological and
political resistance to some needed changes goes beyond
stupidity. It's reprehensible politicization of the country's
well-being. The stupidity of it is beyond belief.



America, the land of the free, where anything/one can be bought
for enough money ;-)


Mark Rand
RTFM


Well, pard', the Supreme Court made it official today: Businesses
and unions can spend as much as they want to for political
campaigns, advertising, and so on. Any Congressman who makes a
deal with them now can write his own ticket.

We're for sale! How much money ya' got? We're not cheap, but the
view is great. You can see Russia from here!



I guess I just don't understand why unions and corporations have all
the rights as people and it seems more. Where is it in the
Constitution that gives them this right? Not being a constitutional
scolar I would really like to know what the rational is for this.

The news report I saw also postulated that soon the Supreme court
will give them the right to contribute directly to political
candidates, something that hasn't been allowed for over a hundred
years.

Yes I do believe you are right, in the next couple of election cycles
our goverenment will be truly bought and paid for by corporations and
we (the USA) will become a corporate state run by and for
corporations.

Von

  #5   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Repackaging Wingers


"Von" wrote in message
...
"Ed Huntress" wrote in
:


"Mark Rand" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:59:39 -0500, "Ed Huntress"

wrote:


An effort to reform health care; to bring Guantanamo prisoners
into the US prison system; and to regulate non-bank-banks and to
re-regulate commercial
bank/investment bank combinations.

And what have the Republicans done? Resisted every step of the
way, with the
help of a few conservative Democrats.

This Congress sucks worse than most, and the Democrats in
Congress suck plenty. But the irrational, ideological and
political resistance to some needed changes goes beyond
stupidity. It's reprehensible politicization of the country's
well-being. The stupidity of it is beyond belief.


America, the land of the free, where anything/one can be bought
for enough money ;-)


Mark Rand
RTFM


Well, pard', the Supreme Court made it official today: Businesses
and unions can spend as much as they want to for political
campaigns, advertising, and so on. Any Congressman who makes a
deal with them now can write his own ticket.

We're for sale! How much money ya' got? We're not cheap, but the
view is great. You can see Russia from here!



I guess I just don't understand why unions and corporations have all
the rights as people and it seems more. Where is it in the
Constitution that gives them this right? Not being a constitutional
scolar I would really like to know what the rational is for this.


It's a debatable point, which is why we got a 5:4 decision. An "originalist"
(conservative) would say they have the right under the 1st Amendment. A
normal person would say that treating corporations or unions as "people" is
absurd. The legal "person" status of corporations was established solely to
limit their liability, to make it easier for them to attract investors.
Originally, it was a strictly commercial decision.

The people in the corporations already have the right to contribute to
whomever they want to.


The news report I saw also postulated that soon the Supreme court
will give them the right to contribute directly to political
candidates, something that hasn't been allowed for over a hundred
years.


Maybe. I haven't read the decision. It may be limited to advertising and
other promotion. But I've read two contradictory accounts of that point so
far.

However, the power they have now, under PACs, is not to be sneezed at. It
was already too much, IMO.


Yes I do believe you are right, in the next couple of election cycles
our goverenment will be truly bought and paid for by corporations and
we (the USA) will become a corporate state run by and for
corporations.

Von


The corporatism is starting to look alarming. It appears that the Supreme
Court has decided that the Constitution *is* a suicide pact, after all.

You'll know for sure if the motto on the dollar bill is changed from "In God
We Trust" to "Always Low Prices." Wal-Mart gave it up as a slogan so it may
be available.

--
Ed Huntress




  #6   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,984
Default Repackaging Wingers

On Jan 21, 7:05*pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:



Well, pard', the Supreme Court made it official today: Businesses and unions
can spend as much as they want to for political campaigns, advertising, and
so on. Any Congressman who makes a deal with them now can write his own
ticket.

We're for sale! How much money ya' got? We're not cheap, but the view is
great. You can see Russia from here!

--
Ed Huntress


Ye of little faith. Corporations can spend as much money on
advertising for products as they want . Yet somehow people manage to
think for themselves and don't blindly buy things because a company
spent a bunch of money advertising. The same applies to politics.
Advertising is not a magic potion. It does make people aware of
things, but it does not control their minds.

It is called a "free market place of ideas". The good ideas will
prevail. Look at the last election. Hillary had all the money in the
beginning, but did not get the votes.
Obama got elected, but will only get re-elected if he does well.

Dan

  #7   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,024
Default Repackaging Wingers


America, the land of the free, where anything/one can be bought for enough
money ;-)


Mark Rand
RTFM


Well, pard', the Supreme Court made it official today: Businesses and unions
can spend as much as they want to for political campaigns, advertising, and
so on. Any Congressman who makes a deal with them now can write his own
ticket.

We're for sale! How much money ya' got? We're not cheap, but the view is
great. You can see Russia from here!



There's your right wing, free market fundamentalist court at work again.
This is a perfect example of how the policies and people that a
president put in place has effects that go on far after the president
has left office. This decision is what only a right wing court would do.
They have basically said that corporations have the right to put as much
money into the electoral system as they want. The joke of it is that
they are trying to pass off simple bribery as "free speech". Just chalk
up one more Supreme Court decision that stinks to high heavens and gives
the corporations even more ability to run the country. I sure hope a
couple of right wing justices die in the next three years so Obama can
load up the court with left wingers. Turn about is fair play.

Hawke
  #8   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Repackaging Wingers


wrote in message
...
On Jan 21, 7:05 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:



Well, pard', the Supreme Court made it official today: Businesses and
unions
can spend as much as they want to for political campaigns, advertising,
and
so on. Any Congressman who makes a deal with them now can write his own
ticket.

We're for sale! How much money ya' got? We're not cheap, but the view is
great. You can see Russia from here!

--
Ed Huntress


Ye of little faith. Corporations can spend as much money on
advertising for products as they want . Yet somehow people manage to
think for themselves and don't blindly buy things because a company
spent a bunch of money advertising. The same applies to politics.
Advertising is not a magic potion. It does make people aware of
things, but it does not control their minds.


Dan, for around 15 years I lived with the LAP (McGraw-Hill), CARR (Cahner's)
and PIM (MIT/Harvard) advertising reports. You want to know how market share
relates to advertising expenditures? On the whole, it's a rising curve that
starts as a parabola, then straightens out, and finally tops out with a
plateau and then a sharp curve downward. Mostly it's a straight line, within
normal limits of expenditure. The correlation coefficient is over 0.7. In
some product categories, the plateau is reached at around $100 million/year.
And there's amazing consistency across product categories.

That's why US ad spending in 2007 was $279.6 Billion -- 2% of the US GDP.

It is called a "free market place of ideas". The good ideas will prevail.


Thanks. Were you a civics teacher? g It's called a propaganda machine; the
ideas pressed with the most money win.

Look at the last election. Hillary had all the money in the beginning,
but did not get the votes. Obama got elected, but will only get re-elected
if he does well.


As I said, the CC is over 0.7. If you want something meaningful, look at the
advertising spending of the winners versus the losers in a large number of
elections over a few election years.

--
Ed Huntress


  #9   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,984
Default Repackaging Wingers

On Jan 22, 1:53*am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

Thanks. Were you a civics teacher? g It's called a propaganda machine; the
ideas pressed with the most money win.

--
Ed Huntress


No, but I took civics, did you? g You just have no faith in the
public.

So you think that Obama should have accepted campaign limits? You
think that Obama won because he raised the most money? So you are
against the free market place of ideas? So you want censorship?

Dan
  #10   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Repackaging Wingers


wrote in message
...
On Jan 22, 1:53 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

Thanks. Were you a civics teacher? g It's called a propaganda machine;
the
ideas pressed with the most money win.

--
Ed Huntress


No, but I took civics, did you? g You just have no faith in the
public.


I have faith in the public. I also have faith in the power of propaganda. It
used to pay my bills.

Like investment banking, it's something that has to be regulated and
controlled, or they'll run all over you. Advertising is a positive and
useful force that, left on its own, will transmogrify into a cancer.


So you think that Obama should have accepted campaign limits? You
think that Obama won because he raised the most money? So you are
against the free market place of ideas? So you want censorship?


That's quite a string of non-sequiturs, Dan. d8-)

Yes, I think the candidates in 2008 should have stuck to campaign limits.
Obama harnessed a new way of accumulating money that sounded like it was all
sweetness and light -- tens of millions in the form of little contributions
gathered through the Internet -- but it's still a hammer that beats down
fair debate, no matter where the money comes from.

Whether he won because of the money is questionable. Anecdotes are not very
useful for analysis. It's the difference between a correlation coefficient
of 0.7 and a coefficient of 1.0. It doesn't work all the time. It just works
*enough* of the time that advertisers spend a couple of hundred billion
dollars per year on it.

The free marketplace of ideas and advertising, in the real world, have
little to do with each other.

Censorship is controlling what can be said. Campaign limits are for avoiding
having our representative democracy become a plutocracy.

Advertising works. It's an important element of the golden rule: The one
with the gold, rules.

--
Ed Huntress




  #11   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,984
Default Repackaging Wingers

On Jan 22, 3:18*pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:



The free marketplace of ideas and advertising, in the real world, have
little to do with each other.


Ed Huntress


But in the real world of politics you don't have just one side
presenting ideas. So even with advertising you have a free
marketplace of ideas.

Sit back and relax. You are going to see just how little this changes
things. The political advertisements just before elections already
consume all the time available for advertising. And the public gets
sick of the adds.

Dan

  #12   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 852
Default Repackaging Wingers

On Thu, 21 Jan 2010 16:28:14 -0500, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:


"Von" wrote in message
.. .
"Ed Huntress" wrote in
:



I guess I just don't understand why unions and corporations have all
the rights as people and it seems more. Where is it in the
Constitution that gives them this right? Not being a constitutional
scolar I would really like to know what the rational is for this.


It's a debatable point, which is why we got a 5:4 decision. An "originalist"
(conservative) would say they have the right under the 1st Amendment. A
normal person would say that treating corporations or unions as "people" is
absurd. The legal "person" status of corporations was established solely to
limit their liability, to make it easier for them to attract investors.
Originally, it was a strictly commercial decision.



So when a company gets prosecuted for causing one or more deaths, can the
company be shut down for 25-to-life?


Mark Rand
RTFM
  #13   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12,529
Default Repackaging Wingers


wrote in message
...
On Jan 22, 3:18 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

The free marketplace of ideas and advertising, in the real world, have
little to do with each other.


Ed Huntress


But in the real world of politics you don't have just one side
presenting ideas. So even with advertising you have a free
marketplace of ideas.


But it ain't free. The majority of it goes to those with the most money.


Sit back and relax. You are going to see just how little this changes
things. The political advertisements just before elections already
consume all the time available for advertising. And the public gets
sick of the adds.


40 CEO's from major companies just sent a letter to Congress today, telling
them to lay off and not to use this as an excuse to call them for money even
more than they already do. They anticipate a flood of solicitations.

Who knows? Lobbies are already gearing up for much higher volumes of work,
as of yesterday.

We'll be pledging allegience to the United States, and to the plutocracy for
which it stands...

Maybe Alexander Hamilton was right. He called this new system of government
a "Commercial Republic."

--
Ed Huntress



  #14   Report Post  
Posted to rec.crafts.metalworking
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,024
Default Repackaging Wingers

wrote:
On Jan 22, 1:53 am, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

Thanks. Were you a civics teacher? g It's called a propaganda machine; the
ideas pressed with the most money win.

--
Ed Huntress


No, but I took civics, did you? g You just have no faith in the
public.

So you think that Obama should have accepted campaign limits? You
think that Obama won because he raised the most money? So you are
against the free market place of ideas? So you want censorship?

Dan



I think the point is that advertising works. Why else would companies
spend so much money on it? They know it works. So does propaganda, which
is why governments use it. The only thing you can have faith about the
public is that they don't know what they are doing and they change their
minds every other day. A good example of this distrust of the public is
the Founding Fathers themselves who had a great fear of the "mob", which
is what they called the public. That's why they did not allow public
election of senators or allow anyone but property owners to vote. They
distrusted the public as does anyone who understands the fickleness and
unpredictability of it. Ed is right, follow the money. In almost every
case the side with the most money prevails. Except of course, when you
are talking about electing women to office. Americans are still
reluctant to elect women to high office. They passed on Hillary for
president and they just passed on Coakley for the senate. Don't
underestimate the gender factor in the outcome of some of these
elections. Women still have a hard time getting elected despite money
advantages. Women make up over half the public but how many of them are
senators? That's the public at work. Even other women would rather vote
for a man. I don't trust the public and I don't trust a jury either. The
old saying, the masses are asses, has a lot of truth. I for one am real
glad we don't have the public calling the shots. We'd be even worse off
than we are now.

Hawke
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wingers Lose Again RBnDFW Metalworking 0 November 5th 09 10:10 PM
Wingers Lose Again RBnDFW Metalworking 0 November 5th 09 09:59 PM
Wingers at Work RB[_2_] Metalworking 5 June 16th 09 04:57 AM
Wingers at Work RB[_2_] Metalworking 0 June 11th 09 10:40 PM
OT - NPR: Don't let the wingers win Cliff Huprich Metalworking 122 September 14th 04 09:53 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:31 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 DIYbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about DIY & home improvement"