That "sharp sword" has _really_ done well so far!

"Gunner" wrote in message
...

"Government should do a few things, and do them well. Government
should not try to be all things to all people," Bush said. But, he
added, "I will rebuild our military power, because a dangerous world
still requires a sharp sword."

In article , Gunner says...

Right about now, the whole idea of a limited Federal Government is far
too radical for most people.

And at the head of that list would be the folks who currently
inhabit the white house at the moment.

Jim

As he kicked off his run for President this weekend, Texas Governor
George W. Bush called for a smaller, more effective government.

Of course he did. That's what his voters want to hear. The
reality is, his present flavor of goobermint is spending out
money at a ferocious rate - he's racked up more charges in
such a short time that he's won the trophy - big spending
equals big government, no matter what warm fuzzy story he
reads at bedtime.

It's time to stop the Tax&Spend republicans from sucking on
the public bottle. They're not effective, and they're not small.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

In article , Gunner says...

Jim, please point out to me, exactly where the increases in the size
of the government have been and we can discuss the issue.

Whoops, sorry, missed the content there. The simple
answer that any high school accounting student could tell
you is:

The RED side of the ledger!

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 08:47:59 GMT, Gunner
calmly ranted:

On 7 Sep 2004 22:04:17 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , pyotr filipivich
says...

Right about now, the whole idea of a limited Federal Government is far
too radical for most people.

And at the head of that list would be the folks who currently
inhabit the white house at the moment.

Yes, truly a Dem in Rep clothing.


As he kicked off his run for President this weekend, Texas Governor
George W. Bush called for a smaller, more effective government.

Yabbut HIS LIPS WERE MOVING, Gunner.


Bush also called for a stronger military as he made a high-profile
appearance in Cedar Rapids, Iowa on Saturday.

Under his leadership, we NEED one.


In Texas, Bush has promoted cooperation between the state government
and religious organizations to address social needs. Bush said he
would try to make it easier for the federal government and faith-based
groups to work together in an "army of compassion" that would attack
problems like drugs and poverty.

"Oh, Christ!" is the best reply I can come up with here.


In what has already become a campaign catchphrase, Bush has described
his leadership philosophy of cooperation between government, religious
institutions and community organizations as "compassionate
conservatism."

I don't understand your use of the incompatible terms "Bush"
and "leadership philosophy" in the same sentence there, dude.

Just say "Neee!"


..-.
Better Living Through Denial
---
http://www.diversify.com Wondrous Website Design

On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:29:54 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

That "sharp sword" has _really_ done well so far!

Indeed. Toppling two regimes, wiping out 80% of the leadership of a
global terror organization and freeing 50,000,000 people from
totalitarian governments.

Not bad hey?

Gunner


"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .

"Government should do a few things, and do them well. Government
should not try to be all things to all people," Bush said. But, he
added, "I will rebuild our military power, because a dangerous world
still requires a sharp sword."



"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosphy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:29:54 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

That "sharp sword" has _really_ done well so far!

Indeed. Toppling two regimes, wiping out 80% of the leadership of a
global terror organization and freeing 50,000,000 people from
totalitarian governments.

To what end? A mission accomplished? I don't like the idea of a war on
terrorism - it gives the warlord a never ending supply of enemies. There can
never be an end to such a war. We definitely need to look at the log in our
own eye on this issue, i.e. why are we a target?

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:29:54 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

That "sharp sword" has _really_ done well so far!

Indeed. Toppling two regimes, wiping out 80% of the leadership of a
global terror organization and freeing 50,000,000 people from
totalitarian governments.

Not bad hey?

Not bad if you're playing Conqueror of the World and you don't mind having a
thousand or so of your troops killed in the process. But what if your job is
to defend the United States, and its people?

Ed Huntress

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...



In Texas, Bush has promoted cooperation between the state government
and religious organizations to address social needs. Bush said he
would try to make it easier for the federal government and faith-based
groups to work together in an "army of compassion" that would attack
problems like drugs and poverty.

"Oh, Christ!" is the best reply I can come up with here.

The army of compassion is the same as the regular army, except there are
little smiley faces painted on the ends of their bullets.

Ed Huntress

Wasn't there a Saturday Night Live skit about Christian Crack. Each rock was
wrapped in it's own bible verse. Praise the Lord

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
t...
"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...



In Texas, Bush has promoted cooperation between the state government
and religious organizations to address social needs. Bush said he
would try to make it easier for the federal government and faith-based
groups to work together in an "army of compassion" that would attack
problems like drugs and poverty.

"Oh, Christ!" is the best reply I can come up with here.

The army of compassion is the same as the regular army, except there are
little smiley faces painted on the ends of their bullets.

Ed Huntress

"Eide" wrote in message
news:hxG%c.286163$Oi.38332@fed1read04...
Wasn't there a Saturday Night Live skit about Christian Crack. Each rock
was
wrapped in it's own bible verse. Praise the Lord

I missed that one. For just a day, I'd like to live inside the head of one
of the skit writers for SNL.

Ed Huntress

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 14:29:04 GMT, Gunner
calmly ranted:

On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:29:54 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

That "sharp sword" has _really_ done well so far!

Indeed. Toppling two regimes,

Creating 2 regimes, then toppling them (when they pulled
some crap) when they didn't like us breaking our promises
to them? Look a little wider in scope for the real picture,
please.


wiping out 80% of the leadership of a global terror organization

Which we created and continue to fuel with our Imperialism?


and freeing 50,000,000 people from
totalitarian governments.

Not bad hey?

Very bad. We can't DO that kind of thing and expect the
results we won here in 200 years of fighting. Kaplan explains
it (in his book "The Coming Anarchy") far better than I can.
Exporting "democracy" doesn't work, period.


..-.
Better Living Through Denial
---
http://www.diversify.com Wondrous Website Design

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 15:05:23 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
calmly ranted:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .



In Texas, Bush has promoted cooperation between the state government
and religious organizations to address social needs. Bush said he
would try to make it easier for the federal government and faith-based
groups to work together in an "army of compassion" that would attack
problems like drugs and poverty.

"Oh, Christ!" is the best reply I can come up with here.

The army of compassion is the same as the regular army, except there are
little smiley faces painted on the ends of their bullets.

"That's a mighty hollow grin on your hollow-point, soldier."
Poppy Bush is no doubt thinking that his son has created a
"Kinder and gentler warring nation".

Speaking of lead, I went out to the range yesterday and got
to fire an old matchlock rifle. It was 1600 reproduction made
from the barrel of a Vulcan minigun. The round lead ball shot
it fired was 20mm, or eighty cal. I couldn't stop grinning
for half an hour after that.

Take aim, reach up with your right hand to pull the cover off
the flash pan, squeeze the trigger (putting the burning end
of the 8' long hemp rope into the flash pan), wait a couple
seconds while keeping aim, and BOOM! It puts nice little bruise
on your upper bicep attachment. I'd want some extra padding in
there if I shot one very often, but that was a real hoot. And
while I was being tutored on shooting the thing, folks wandered
by yelling "Hey, I smell Pot!" as they caught a whiff of the
hemp rope burning.


..-.
Better Living Through Denial
---
http://www.diversify.com Wondrous Website Design

In article , Larry Jaques says...

Very bad. We can't DO that kind of thing and expect the
results we won here in 200 years of fighting. Kaplan explains
it (in his book "The Coming Anarchy") far better than I can.
Exporting "democracy" doesn't work, period.

And besides, when we do, we export dictatorships. Central
America is rife with US-installed potentates. Where *did*
Hussain come from, anyway?

The absolutely best thing for America to do is lead by
example. Not by invasion.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
...


Speaking of lead, I went out to the range yesterday and got
to fire an old matchlock rifle. It was 1600 reproduction made
from the barrel of a Vulcan minigun. The round lead ball shot
it fired was 20mm, or eighty cal. I couldn't stop grinning
for half an hour after that.

'Sounds like fun. Was the grinning on purpose, or is that the way it left
your face, after you shot it?

BTW, the Japanese are really good with matchlocks. It's all that most of
them are allowed to shoot.

Ed Huntress

On Mon, 06 Sep 2004 14:53:20 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Eide" wrote in message
news:5J__c.266214$Oi.24669@fed1read04...

"Gunner" wrote in message
...

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosphy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke

I think your sig lines are interesting.

What's interesting about this one is that P.J. O'Rourke was a flaming
liberal who wrote for Ramparts. A sniveling brat himself, he got p.o.'d when
he didn't get promoted and he then became a right-wing pundit who wrote for
the American Spectator.

Ah, but do you remember him from National Lampoon. Those were the
days.

O'Rourke is a clever and witty fellow who is blessed with an endless supply
of fodder for his sarcasms and put-downs: Himself.

And Doug Kenney is dead.

Ed Huntress

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 23:00:14 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
calmly ranted:

"Larry Jaques" wrote in message
.. .

Speaking of lead, I went out to the range yesterday and got
to fire an old matchlock rifle. It was 1600 reproduction made
from the barrel of a Vulcan minigun. The round lead ball shot
it fired was 20mm, or eighty cal. I couldn't stop grinning
for half an hour after that.

'Sounds like fun. Was the grinning on purpose, or is that the way it left
your face, after you shot it?

C - Both of the above.


BTW, the Japanese are really good with matchlocks. It's all that most of
them are allowed to shoot.

They're not too bad with longbows, swords, or shuriken, either.


--
Guns don't kill people. Rappers do!
-----------------------------------
www.diversify.com Rap-free Website Development

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 15:00:10 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:29:54 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

That "sharp sword" has _really_ done well so far!

Indeed. Toppling two regimes, wiping out 80% of the leadership of a
global terror organization and freeing 50,000,000 people from
totalitarian governments.

Not bad hey?

Not bad if you're playing Conqueror of the World and you don't mind having a
thousand or so of your troops killed in the process. But what if your job is
to defend the United States, and its people?

Ed Huntress


What ever happened with the allegations and book that scrub had a hard
on for daddy's ole whore from day one? If I was on his cabinet I'd be
playing Serpico and try to get him out the same day.

I think that scrub really screwed up by not standing up right away and
said duty calls to the school kids.

What escapes me is why anyone would want to be Pres. Scrub is a dim
wit and having rich immoral (IM0) rat ambulance chasers is almost as
bad. At least the attorney should have some common since. But, I still
don't think I'll vote. Why go down and write in Ed?

From my perspective the economy is way below expectations after 911.
Also , I think this world economy is being advaned way too fast for
the world to have a pay back within our life span. Good over all when
it happens , but at the moment it seems that the rich will get richer
off of short term profits and weaken our nation for the sake of a far
off pipe dream.

The US controlling the whole world is not going to happen. When the
planes hit the buildings I knew what it was about. Then I was shocked
that most people wouldn't say anything wrong about the US. Sure they
maybe be rouge and zealots , but they didn't dream this all up for
nothing. It will never be settled while people believe that Isitreal ,
Mecca, and other religious locations are where "god" will return.
There are many cultures that think that way , kinda like putting
momentous and having to be where a loved one actually died.

I think things would get better if we stopped giving money to other
countries and see how they do to get a grasp of how a world economy
would really work. I can see why we would want to jump in for Kuwait
even wrong , but why can't people acknowledge why Isitreal has been
propped up? Why didn't the Saudi's spend all their $ to liberate
Kuwait ASAP ?

Sure its a big deep mess that the world is in , but I think a little
more honesty would help more than anything else. Or, try to educate
the masses that ideals are more metaphor than physical.

I missed the staff meeting but the minutes show jim rozen
wrote back on 7 Sep 2004 22:04:17 -0700 in
rec.crafts.metalworking :
In article , pyotr filipivich
says...

Right about now, the whole idea of a limited Federal Government is far
too radical for most people.

And at the head of that list would be the folks who currently
inhabit the white house at the moment.

I'd consider them to be more favorably disposed to the idea, in "an
interesting concept, a notion, a good idea but not really practical" sort
of way, than the Democrats, who might mouth the words "The era of big
government is over" but what they mean by that is more along the lines of
"the days of spending money on the military hardware are over" than any
actual attempt to shrink the government. After all, if it weren't for the
Government, who would set wages? Who would fund the arts, cultural events,
radio, TV? Who would see that children are fed at school, schools are run,
taxes are collected and the government employees get paid on time?

tschus
pyotr
--
pyotr filipivich.
as an explaination for the decline in the US's tech edge, James
Niccol wrote "It used to be that the USA was pretty good at
producing stuff teenaged boys could lose a finger or two playing with."

I missed the staff meeting but the minutes show "Eide"
wrote back on Wed, 8 Sep 2004 10:57:21 -0400 in
rec.crafts.metalworking :

To what end? A mission accomplished? I don't like the idea of a war on
terrorism - it gives the warlord a never ending supply of enemies. There can
never be an end to such a war. We definitely need to look at the log in our
own eye on this issue, i.e. why are we a target?

Because people like you still let your women folk dress like
prostitutes. You still let them out on the streets unescorted by a
responsible male relative.
And the offensive nature of what is broadcast on TV, and presented in
the movies, that must stop.

Sorry "eide", but you are the reason the Wahabbist radicals like bin
Laden et al, hate the United States. What you need to do is convert now,
and not to any watered down version of Islam, but to the One, True, Faith,
as interpreted by Imams of the Wahabist school. It won't be easy, but you
know what you need to do.

Hop to it!


pyotr

YHVH Akbar!
--
pyotr filipivich.
as an explaination for the decline in the US's tech edge, James
Niccol wrote "It used to be that the USA was pretty good at
producing stuff teenaged boys could lose a finger or two playing with."

On 8 Sep 2004 06:31:55 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

Jim, please point out to me, exactly where the increases in the size
of the government have been and we can discuss the issue.

Whoops, sorry, missed the content there. The simple
answer that any high school accounting student could tell
you is:

The RED side of the ledger!

Jim

Jim Jim Jim..please dont weasel. Be specific ok? Teach me something.

Gunner

"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
the Democrats proves again, it is better to have your eye plucked
out by an eagle than to be nibbled to death by ducks." - Norman
Liebmann

On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 10:57:21 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:29:54 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

That "sharp sword" has _really_ done well so far!

Indeed. Toppling two regimes, wiping out 80% of the leadership of a
global terror organization and freeing 50,000,000 people from
totalitarian governments.

To what end? A mission accomplished? I don't like the idea of a war on
terrorism - it gives the warlord a never ending supply of enemies. There can
never be an end to such a war. We definitely need to look at the log in our
own eye on this issue, i.e. why are we a target?

Why are we a target? You mean other than a 12th century culture
clashing headlong with a 21st century one, while the warlords and
fundimentalists drive the Jihad for their own personal power base and
enrichment?

Gunner


"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
the Democrats proves again, it is better to have your eye plucked
out by an eagle than to be nibbled to death by ducks." - Norman
Liebmann

On Wed, 08 Sep 2004 15:00:10 GMT, "Ed Huntress"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:29:54 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

That "sharp sword" has _really_ done well so far!

Indeed. Toppling two regimes, wiping out 80% of the leadership of a
global terror organization and freeing 50,000,000 people from
totalitarian governments.

Not bad hey?

Not bad if you're playing Conqueror of the World and you don't mind having a
thousand or so of your troops killed in the process. But what if your job is
to defend the United States, and its people?


Still works out just fine. Remember the Cole? Leon Klinghoffer?
Various airliners that were turned into lawn darts?

Frankly Ed. the US could have conqured the world after WW2. We didnt.
Nor are we doing so now.
However..we are indeed making sure that the rest of the world plays
nice. One dead tango at a time.

Seems we are going into partnership with Russia now as well..should
make for interesting body counts.

Those boys never cared much about "collateral damage"

Im still in favor of the Pax Americana doctrine though..

Gunner

Ed Huntress


"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
the Democrats proves again, it is better to have your eye plucked
out by an eagle than to be nibbled to death by ducks." - Norman
Liebmann

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On 8 Sep 2004 06:31:55 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

Jim, please point out to me, exactly where the increases in the size
of the government have been and we can discuss the issue.

Whoops, sorry, missed the content there. The simple
answer that any high school accounting student could tell
you is:

The RED side of the ledger!

Jim

Jim Jim Jim..please dont weasel. Be specific ok? Teach me something.

Here ya' go, Gunner. Check the historical tables near the end of this US
Budget Report from the White House. Fiscal Year 2002 began on October 1st,
2001, so that's the first one you can pin on Dubya:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget...5/pdf/hist.pdf

As you can see, Dubya and the Republican-controlled Congress have increased
spending in virtually every category. Some of them are real beauts.

If you want details, you can find more at:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2005/

The one I pointed to above is the Historical Tables.

If this is Bush's idea of "smaller government," I hope he doesn't try to
make it any smaller. He'll drive us into bankrupcy before the next pres is
installed.

Ed Huntress

In article , SteveF says...

Exactly which clause of this
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/complian...irpay/main.htm is causing you
grief.

Well, you could try *this* one for starters:

http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/fairpay/fs17c_administrative.htm

If you make 450 bucks a week, and do adminstrative work, they can
deny you overtime. Did you actually *read* the link you provided?

There's lots others. The name of the game here is to increase the
number of ways they can deny folks overtime. The new regs were
written to benfit the employers.

Like dilbert says, "If they wanted to give you more money, they'd
just *give* you more money."

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

In article , Ed Huntress says...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget...5/pdf/hist.pdf

As you can see, Dubya and the Republican-controlled Congress have increased
spending in virtually every category. Some of them are real beauts.

If you want details, you can find more at:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2005/

The one I pointed to above is the Historical Tables.

If this is Bush's idea of "smaller government," I hope he doesn't try to
make it any smaller. He'll drive us into bankrupcy before the next pres is
installed.


Thank you Ed.

Gunner, if that's small government, you can leave me right
out. The man's spending money like a drunken sailor.
Hint, that's the *red* side of the ledger. Any high school
kid who's taken a intro accounting course could explain this.

Hell, anyone who runs a household, or a business understands
it. So I know for darn sure you do. So *why* do you insist
on turning a blind eye to what's going on? Is it only out
of party loyalty?

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

In article , pyotr filipivich
says...

I'd consider them to be more favorably disposed to the idea, in "an
interesting concept, a notion, a good idea but not really practical" sort
of way, than the Democrats, who might mouth the words "The era of big
government is over" but what they mean by that is more along the lines of
"the days of spending money on the military hardware are over" than any
actual attempt to shrink the government.

Money talks - the present adminstration holds quite a record
on *increasing* government size, which is direction proportional
to government spending. How can *anyone* say that the existing
folks in the white house want to shrink goverment when their
actions are 180 degrees off? Sure they tell a nice bedtime
story but at the same time they're hosing us.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

What about Canada? Brazil? Australia? Iceland?
It's not because we do those things, there are a lot of other peoples that
do those things. I think the US is too headstrong. We think that the rest of
the world needs to live like we do.

It's like when your wife or girlfriend really wants to have a cookie. The
guilt of "sneaking" a cookie is too much, so instead of just having a
cookie, she brings a plate of them and sets them in front of you - so you
can both have cookies. Shared guilt.

Or, when the bully in the playground gets told he's a jerk. He then replies,
"nope, you're the jerk." And punches the kid in the mouth.
He's too insecure to do anything else.

Eide


"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 10:57:21 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:29:54 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

That "sharp sword" has _really_ done well so far!

Indeed. Toppling two regimes, wiping out 80% of the leadership of a
global terror organization and freeing 50,000,000 people from
totalitarian governments.

To what end? A mission accomplished? I don't like the idea of a war on
terrorism - it gives the warlord a never ending supply of enemies. There
can
never be an end to such a war. We definitely need to look at the log in
our
own eye on this issue, i.e. why are we a target?

Why are we a target? You mean other than a 12th century culture
clashing headlong with a 21st century one, while the warlords and
fundimentalists drive the Jihad for their own personal power base and
enrichment?

Gunner


"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
the Democrats proves again, it is better to have your eye plucked
out by an eagle than to be nibbled to death by ducks." - Norman
Liebmann

On 9 Sep 2004 05:06:45 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , SteveF says...

Exactly which clause of this
http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/complian...irpay/main.htm is causing you
grief.

Well, you could try *this* one for starters:

http://www.dol.gov/esa/regs/compliance/whd/fairpay/fs17c_administrative.htm

If you make 450 bucks a week, and do adminstrative work, they can
deny you overtime. Did you actually *read* the link you provided?

Ah...Jim...Ive worked for quite a bit less than $450 a week as an
administrator and was denied overtime for many years.

So whats new?

Gunner

"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
the Democrats proves again, it is better to have your eye plucked
out by an eagle than to be nibbled to death by ducks." - Norman
Liebmann

In article , Gunner says...

Ah...Jim...Ive worked for quite a bit less than $450 a week as an
administrator and was denied overtime for many years.

Worked. When was that?

Try living in the NY metro area on 500 a week, today.

What's different is, there are workers who used to get
overtime. Now they don't. Nearly all the adminstrative
workers make that much.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On 9 Sep 2004 11:34:29 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

Ah...Jim...Ive worked for quite a bit less than $450 a week as an
administrator and was denied overtime for many years.

Worked. When was that?
Up until I became a Machine tool service tech 8 yrs ago.


Try living in the NY metro area on 500 a week, today.

Why the hell would I want to? The place sucks. Gee Jim, try buying
a house in Malibu if you make $2000 a week.

Thats a bit of an inane comment from you Jim.

What's different is, there are workers who used to get
overtime. Now they don't. Nearly all the adminstrative
workers make that much.


At this point Jim, no one knows for sure who will and who wont. And
based on all reports so far..there are loads of people who were not
eligible for overtime,that now are. Time will tell.

Gunner
Jim

"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
the Democrats proves again, it is better to have your eye plucked
out by an eagle than to be nibbled to death by ducks." - Norman
Liebmann

In article , Gunner says...

At this point Jim, no one knows for sure who will and who wont. And
based on all reports so far..there are loads of people who were not
eligible for overtime,that now are. Time will tell.

It sure will. My feeling (call me one of those tinfoil hat
nutcases if you will) is that if the business interests who
were pushing for this change wanted it, then the net effect
is a financial benefit to them.

I'd love to report that net wage payments are up on account
of it. Don't hold your breath though.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On 10 Sep 2004 12:29:34 -0700, jim rozen
wrote:

In article , Gunner says...

At this point Jim, no one knows for sure who will and who wont. And
based on all reports so far..there are loads of people who were not
eligible for overtime,that now are. Time will tell.

It sure will. My feeling (call me one of those tinfoil hat
nutcases if you will) is that if the business interests who
were pushing for this change wanted it, then the net effect
is a financial benefit to them.

I'd love to report that net wage payments are up on account
of it. Don't hold your breath though.

Jim

Ok. You are a tinfoil hat nutcase.
G

Gunner

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosphy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke

Eide wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:29:54 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

That "sharp sword" has _really_ done well so far!

Indeed. Toppling two regimes, wiping out 80% of the leadership of a
global terror organization and freeing 50,000,000 people from
totalitarian governments.

To what end? A mission accomplished? I don't like the idea of a war on
terrorism - it gives the warlord a never ending supply of enemies. There can
never be an end to such a war. We definitely need to look at the log in our
own eye on this issue, i.e. why are we a target?

Why are we a target?
Simple. Our system works, theirs doesn't and a few of them hate us for it.

I could turn that into a doctoral dissertation, but that's it in a nutshell. It
is the victim's blame game writ large.

Was it worth it? Well, I happen to think that getting rid of a couple of the
most repressive, tryannical, scabrous and just plain evil regimes on the face of
the planet was worth it. YMMV however.

That said, I share your concern about the civil liberties implications of some
of the things we are doing, or which have been proposed. Americans have always
had a serious problem distinguishing between babies and bathwater when the
situation turns hairy. Indeed one of the reasons we mark this sad anniversary is
that we did some stupidly extreme things to our intelligence agencies back in
the 1970s. (Can you say "Church Commission"?) The difference is that given our
society's drift to statism, I'm not sure how far we'll come back from this
particular bout of excess.

--RC

In article , Rick Cook says...

Why are we a target?
Simple. Our system works, theirs doesn't and a few of them hate us for it.

Well there's a bit more to it that that. If your point were really
true, and the full truth of the matter, then we'd still be a target
if we:

a) stopped supporting the saudis

b) stopped supporting israel

c) stopped invading middle eastern countries for cheap oil

d) stopped supporting secular governments in muslim countries

e) stopped medding where we have no reason to meddle.

Yes our system works, and it works *great*. What better way
to lead, than by example? It's a lot better than leading
by, say, invasion.

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

Eide wrote:

What about Canada? Brazil? Australia? Iceland?

What about them? They're all targets as well, and equally hated by this wacko
minority.


It's not because we do those things, there are a lot of other peoples that
do those things.

Uh, have you ever actually _listened_ to these people you presume to understand?
(In translation, of course. I'm told it the effect is much more compelling in
Arabic and, say, Farsi because of the rhetorical power of those languages, honed
by a millenia-long tradition of oratory as an art form.) Believe me, they hate
everyone in the West just as much and most of the 'third world' only a little
less. True, the United States is their poster child, because we are the leader
of the world they hate and fear. We also have a very parochial tendency to
exaggerate anything that touches us and not to notice anything that doesn't. But
neither their hatred nor their venom is reserved for us.

(Look up copies of bin Laden's 'fatwas' on the net. There are also some of the
fire-eaters' sermons around, but go for the stuff that was originally intended
for home consumption and translated, not the propaganda written in English.)


I think the US is too headstrong.

Actually we have a very natural tendency to object to people killing thousands
of our fellow citizens in terrorist attacks. That's our main motivator.

We think that the rest of the world needs to live like we do.

Perhaps. But so does almost everyone in their part of the world. The people in
those regions want desperately to live like we do with our standards of health,
nutrition, rule of law and basic human rights. The overriding problem, and the
thing that gives such power to a few nut cases, is that they have never figured
out how to do it it. Modernism and secularization haven't worked in those
regions and neither has traditionalism in various guises. The common people
still end up dirt poor and treated like dirt and their baffled resentment turns
to rage.



It's like when your wife or girlfriend really wants to have a cookie. The
guilt of "sneaking" a cookie is too much, so instead of just having a
cookie, she brings a plate of them and sets them in front of you - so you
can both have cookies. Shared guilt.

Or, when the bully in the playground gets told he's a jerk. He then replies,
"nope, you're the jerk." And punches the kid in the mouth.
He's too insecure to do anything else.

Both these examples point, by implication, to one of the reasons we have so much
trouble understanding what we're facing. Far too many of us want to see the
situation in terms of our own motives and our own understandings of the world.
So we seize on those parts of what the extremists say which come closest to our
own experience and thought patterns and proclaim that as the reason. John
Campbell called this "Hobson Jobson" many years ago and pointed out it doesn't
work.

The traditional cultures in most parts of the world are _not_ like us. They see
things differently and they react to different patterns. That doesn't make them
evil, it doesn't make them superior; it simply makes them different.

--RC



Eide

"Gunner" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 10:57:21 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

"Gunner" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 8 Sep 2004 09:29:54 -0400, "Eide"
wrote:

That "sharp sword" has _really_ done well so far!

Indeed. Toppling two regimes, wiping out 80% of the leadership of a
global terror organization and freeing 50,000,000 people from
totalitarian governments.

To what end? A mission accomplished? I don't like the idea of a war on
terrorism - it gives the warlord a never ending supply of enemies. There
can
never be an end to such a war. We definitely need to look at the log in
our
own eye on this issue, i.e. why are we a target?

Why are we a target? You mean other than a 12th century culture
clashing headlong with a 21st century one, while the warlords and
fundimentalists drive the Jihad for their own personal power base and
enrichment?

Gunner


"In my humble opinion, the petty carping levied against Bush by
the Democrats proves again, it is better to have your eye plucked
out by an eagle than to be nibbled to death by ducks." - Norman
Liebmann

"Gunner" wrote

... Remember the Cole?


Yes. But since it was one of _Clinton's_ ships, Dubya apparently felt no need
to do anything about it. Maybe he was waiting for evidence that Saddam was
responsible, eh?

-- TP

jim rozen wrote:

In article , Rick Cook says...

Why are we a target?
Simple. Our system works, theirs doesn't and a few of them hate us for it.

Well there's a bit more to it that that.

Jim, there's an _enormous_ amount more to it than that. But the vast majority
of it is not what you seem to think it is and I didn't want to write a book on
an irrelevant subject.


If your point were really
true, and the full truth of the matter, then we'd still be a target
if we:

a) stopped supporting the saudis

b) stopped supporting israel

c) stopped invading middle eastern countries for cheap oil

d) stopped supporting secular governments in muslim countries

e) stopped medding where we have no reason to meddle.

If we stopped doing all those things we'd still be a target. These people have
made that very clear, at least in the stuff they put out for the consumption of
our people.

Even if we take all your points as absolutely true (and the last one is utterly
bizarre in the post 9/11 world) this minority would still hate us. Most of the
ones who hate us enough to kill us hate us that badly because a) we are
successful and that highlights their failures and b) we do not conform to their
medieval mindset. (And no, that last is not a pejorative. It is a fairly exact
description and this minority is proud of the fact.)

I could run on at some length about this, but I'll ask you a question instead.
Have you ever heard of the Dar al Harb? Do you understand the implications of
taking that term literally ? As the Islamic extremists do and the vast majority
of their co-religionists don't.

Israel, the Saudis and such are functionally minor issues in those parts of the
world, no matter how much they may figure in propaganda by both the extremists
and not-so-extremists. (Those issues also serve as convenient stalking horses
for governments that need to dissipate anger over their failures.)

This is combined with our tendency to grasp on to 'reasons' that make sense in
our context and ignore the rest of what's going on, even when it is far more
central to the overall picture.



Yes our system works, and it works *great*.

No, our 'system' for dealing with this problem works *terribly*. But we're not
going to fix that until we comprehend what we're dealing with.

What better way
to lead, than by example? It's a lot better than leading
by, say, invasion.

Uh, Jim. . .
It is precisely our example that infuriates this minority and rouses a few of
them to murderous rage. Our overall system is what these crazies want
desperately to destroy.

--RC


Jim

--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

In article , Rick Cook says...

If we stopped doing all those things we'd still be a target. These people have
made that very clear, at least in the stuff they put out for the consumption of
our people.

Actually not true. Did you ever read the transcripts of
any of the broadcasts?

Jim


--
==================================================
please reply to:
JRR(zero) at pkmfgvm4 (dot) vnet (dot) ibm (dot) com
==================================================

On Sun, 12 Sep 2004 16:17:03 -0400, "tonyp"
wrote:

Imagine what _might_ have happened if Dubya, our great warrior president, had
gone after bin Laden in the spring and summer of 2001. Would he have had the
chance to stand on the rubble pile with a bullhorn? Would Rudi Giuliani have
had a chance to "thank god that George Bush is our president"? Maybe, maybe
not. We can never know, because Dubya punted, on the Cole.

-- TP

Gee Tony..you mean that Bush should really have gone after the
terrorists even when all you lefties say he was breaking the law to do
so?

Please make up your minds. Either Bush did the right thing (albit late
according to you) or he is an evil Right Wing Neocon Fascist Nazi
traitor (hmmm what else does the Left say...oh ya) who went to war for
oil and to make his rich friends richer.

Please discuss this with your Left/Lib friends, come to a consensus
and get back to me, ok?

Which reminds me..since Clinton seems to figure large in your
post..why didnt he take custody of bin Ladin when the Sudenese offered
him up...twice? The little blast the desert and blow up an asprin
factory bit was interesting..but not exactly effective. Least of all
when doing so to deflect the publics attention from the Monica
scandal.

Seems your boy screwed the pooch by not keeping his pants zipped, and
not taking care of bin Ladin when he should have.

He had what..8 yrs in office, while Bush had 231 days prior to 9-11

Your claims, while spinning the truth beautifuly..are stil spun.

Gunner



Gunner

"At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child -
miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied,
demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless.
Liberalism is a philosphy of sniveling brats." -- P.J. O'Rourke

"jim rozen" wrote in message
...
In article , Rick Cook says...

If we stopped doing all those things we'd still be a target. These people
have
made that very clear, at least in the stuff they put out for the
consumption of
our people.

Actually not true. Did you ever read the transcripts of
any of the broadcasts?

Jim


Wrong. Totally wrong. Go over there and live amongst them for a few years,
Rozen. There are a certain minority of people in the middle east that
are_consumed_with hatred of the US and the West. I was there from '78-82,
before most of the so-called reasons transpired that you're holding up as a
source for their hatred. It just, by God,_is_hatred, deep and profound, of
the West. It was a puzzling topic for discussion amongst myself and the men
I worked with. We finally decided it was mostly based on religiion and
little else. I believe that's accurate. Don't take my word for it. Get
yourself over there, experience it, and then tell us what you think. Your
opinions may carry some weight then. From where I'm sitting, you flat don't
know what you're posting about on this thread.

Garrett Fulton




-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----