American Politics

[§haÅ--Ñ€ §hÅŽo 370]

The government know there flaws and there doing a bad job trying to hide it. For instance: When everyone knows that we could stop spending money on imports, they try to raise taxes and use stimulus packages. It's simple. I feel like America has also gotten way to nosy getting into stuff not concerning it. If two countries get into a war the U.S will be one of the first to jump into it after it has started.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Happy birthday, America!

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Man, been forever!

rather than try to argue politics here anymore, I'll just say I trust Rand Paul far more than our Undocumented-Worker-In-Chief. Yeah, I said it and I'll say it again, so keep your hair on . And BTW has anyone seen the video of the longtime admin of Columbia University say that our UWIC never attended Columbia, and instead bought his degree? Of course you haven't. He's not hard to find and has the credentials to show for his statements but no one cares. *Cult Of Personality plays in background* ... Hold the Kool-Aid, thanks.

How about Golden Sacks and Tony Hayward 'divesting' themselves of BP shares just before the spill... 3 coincidences make a conspiracy? GS again... man, they have got to be the luckiest brokerage bank in the whole Fed Reserve, no? First their miraculous foreknowledge of the crash, now the short-sale of a disaster-prone oil giant? Starting to look mighty fishy, outside of brokers selling short, who benefitted? Follow the money.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

I would be careful what I put on the public broadcast Internet if I were living in America.  It is well known that the NSA filters all Internet traffic using an automated system.  If you really can document that stuff, well and good, but don't be surprised if the Gestapo (Homeland Security) comes calling.

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Interesting you should say that... I talked to a woman some time ago who works in a Federal law-enforcement agency, and puts on music shows for terminally ill and handicapped kids in her spare time. She sought me out to very quietly tell me I am indeed on a watchlist for my political commentary on Facebook. She is another fan, and had firsthand knowledge of my name from documents in her office and their database. I have never called for violence or bloodshed against the gov't in a way that would justify such attention. I just happen to be outspoken and about as dry, sarcastic, and droll as I can muster. If you remember, I am pretty good at it too.

IMHO... fork 'em. I haven't slowed down a bit or tempered my comments. I'm sure if I were Canadian, I would have been prosecuted many times already under the goofy 'hate-speech' laws enacted there; but I have done nothing to violate US laws so they can sit and spin.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Naw.  Our hate-speech laws have to do with public figures who call the government Nazi-lovers, and people who burn crosses on other people's lawns.  A little sarcasm wouldn't turn on our thought-police.  Look at what the Khadr family says about Canada, and our Supreme Court is still trying to spring Omar from Guantanamo.  I would like to export that tribe to Syria when we do get him back, but it would be hard since they have Canadian citizenship.

You have to do something pretty stupid to get caught in our net.  We are a rather tolerant people, and we do believe in freedom of speech.  Link.  See Section 2(b).

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

The much-maligned (but a good part of an overall diet of a wide range of news sources regardless) Fox News recently did a special called 'What's So Great About America?' with John Stossel. It was featuring  the book by the same name (link).

A Canadian man was prosecuted tirelessly for 'hate speech' for reporting on the Mohammed cartoon violence. One single imam complained, and it took 3 years and over $100,000 in legal fees to declare his right to free speech.

You don't have to be wrong, just not able to afford to fight. To be investigated at all was a crime against judgement and common sense, but with gov't backing, any law can be ignored. Innocent until proven guilty? What if the supposed 'crime' is entirely subjective? Free speech is always the first to go, the canary in the coal mine.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Arizona's immigration law mess heats up.

[Duke87 1,070]

Well, immigration is supposed to be a federal matter... so they do have a legitimate basis for challenging it.

But all of these political games accomplish nothing towards actually solving the border problem.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Fortunately for us, we have this big buffer state between Mexico and Canada.  On the other hand, we quite often import bus-loads of Mexican nationals with work-permits as itinerant farm labour.  The Canadian farmer doesn't have his own kids to work the place any more, and some of the veggie farms in the bottom lands are of incredible size.

So we get migrant workers from Mexico, put them up in bunk houses, pay them minimum wage ($10/hr in Ontario), and they go into the towns on the weekend for a few cervaces and a little joy.  They go home at the end of the season with a pretty reasonable stash of cash too.

I am afraid the problem on the Rio Grande is that your illegals want to stay.  Well, just what was it you did when your people got off the Mayflower?  As far as the native peoples were concerned, they were illegals, too.

[LarksTonguesInAspic 28]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

I still wish Hulk Hogan had popped Stossel just a little bit harder back around the cusp of the 90s. Can't stand that guy.

Barbarossaquote>

You are thinking of Dr Death Steve Schultz, who broke his jaw with an open-hand slap to prove wrestling wasn't fake. That was actually in the early 80s. We're getting old, B.

Schultz was banned for life from pro wrestling for that, too.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Originally posted by: manticorefan

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

I still wish Hulk Hogan had popped Stossel just a little bit harder back around the cusp of the 90s. Can't stand that guy.

Barbarossaquote>

You are thinking of Dr Death Steve Schultz, who broke his jaw with an open-hand slap to prove wrestling wasn't fake. That was actually in the early 80s. We're getting old, B.

Schultz was banned for life from pro wrestling for that, too.quote>

Bunch of real conservatives, those "pro" wrestlers.

I wonder what they would do with someone like Lou Thez these days.  He could make those pansies run for the exits with a hard look.

[Duke87 1,070]

Originally posted by: A Nonny Moose

I am afraid the problem on the Rio Grande is that your illegals want to stay.  Well, just what was it you did when your people got off the Mayflower?  As far as the native peoples were concerned, they were illegals, too.quote>

The problem isn't the decent people that want to come here to make a living. They can stay. Just get them registered as legal residents rather than having them be undocumented.

The problem is the drug gangs and other thugs that are commiting all sorts of violent crimes and making the region near the border unsafe to live in. They are the people we need to be keeping out of this country. Which is why we do need to actually secure the border.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Originally posted by: Duke87

The problem is the drug gangs and other thugs that are commiting all sorts of violent crimes and making the region near the border unsafe to live in. They are the people we need to be keeping out of this country. Which is why we do need to actually secure the border.

quote>

Well, I can understand that, but you'll have to tear the money away from the military/industrial boodlers in order to do that.  It would probably cost less than the futile war in Iraq.

If you want to interdict the Rio Grande and the rest of the Mexican/U.S. border area, have they considered armed UAVs?

[Chuck Ferrari 0]

president obama didnt place the black wreath at the tomb of the unkown soilders this year. this has been a tradition since 1946. its supposed to be symbolic of the presidents appreciation for the sacrifices troops make past present and future. Pretty low blow to the troops i think

[Jorganza 0]

Golly gee whiz Chuck Ferrari, Bush and Reagan also skipped the wreath laying at the Tomb of the Unknowns at least once during their times in office. I guessed that slipped out of mind huh? Oh that's right, when a republican does it, all is good in the world, but when it's someone else, all heck breaks loose.

"Is Obama the first President to skip the ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery?" (Answer of course, no)

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/memorialday.asp

[Chuck Ferrari 0]

jorganza u do realize that snopes is a sight ran by a couple old people that started as a joke they dont research anything its as lagit as wikipedia and tmz

[Chuck Ferrari 0]

republican democrat to skip that is down right disrespectful to the men and women who sacrifice there lives to protect the u.s and its freedoms

[SC4BOY 21]

Originally posted by: Chuck Ferrari

jorganza u do realize that snopes is a sight ran by a couple old people that started as a joke they dont research anything its as lagit as wikipedia and tmzquote>

*BZZZZZZT" Wrongo!  .. this site is recognized WORLD WIDE as legit. It is indeed run by "a couple old people". Most anything can be posted in their messages, but when it is posted as anything but "unknown" it has indeed been researched. [both of those "old people" are researchers by profession  ]  It also includes a bibliography if you care to find how they arrived at their conclusion. This is not in any way analogous to either wiki or tmz.

That particular point:

"Is Obama the first President to skip the ceremony at Arlington National Cemetery?"

is clearly labeled "False" and the facts of the issue are posted. I'm no Obama supporter, but to carry on a slanderous approach to the issue is disingenuous at best and a flat lie at worst. There are plenty of reasons not to like Obama without inventing reasons.

[L'orignaux inconnu 0]

@chuck ferrari:  Watch what you say, boy.  I'm an old people!  Also, if you bothered to read the rules you should know it is ne kulturny to post two messages in a thread next to each other the same day.  That is what the Edit button is for.  You can put in  a horizontal line to separate your comments.

BTW, why do you want to "chuck Ferrari"?  They make a pretty good buggy.

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[L'orignaux inconnu 0]

Sorry, Red.  I was irritated.  Sharku indeed!

[Barbarossa 51]

.

  Edited September 8, 2012 by Barbarossa  

[Duke87 1,070]

I've always been surprised how bothered some people can be by the use of profanity. Growing up, the use of "bad words" around my house was commonplace and it never really seemed like a big deal. "Don't say anything you wouldn't say in front of your mother" places basically no restriction on decency for me if I take it literally.

And indeed, I tend to find bleeps and whatnot to be rather jarring. This is a big part of why I do not listen to the radio. Edited music is unbearable to listen to.

All that said, I can understand why a network would engage in controlling their content. There is a market for family friendly programming. What I do not see is why having content be officially regulated is necessary.... or how it is constitutional.

[blade2k5 1,523]

Originally posted by: Barbarossa

So, I came across this story in the news today and thought it would be a perfect contribution to discussion.  I have always (read:  ALWAYS) been opposed to FCC regulation of language.  Perhaps this is part of my Libertarian side (*winks at Duke87*).  I do not, and never will, accept government restriction on the use of WORDS.  I find absolutely no reason for the government to tell me or anyone else what words they can use when broadcasting.  In fact, I think that said restrictions are 1) an affront to Freedom of Speech, and 2)  an insult to the populace.  It is an ideology that should be completely and irretrievably destroyed.

I am all for using colorful language in discussion, whether in internet forums, on TV, or on the radio.  My POV is:  "If you don't like the language used, then bugger off.  Stop whining like an adolescent and grow up or go back to your crib and live there for the rest of your life, you twit".  Yeah, that might sound harsh, but it is common sense, IMO.

Barbarossaquote>

Harsh?  That's tame compared to how I'd phrase it, but I agree with you 100% on this one.

I'm also with Duke as well.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Well, fellows, we are all on the same wavelength.

I happen to a holder of a Restricted Marine Radio Operator's permit, a.k.a. a VHF Marine License.  Now on these airwaves, there are certain things you must not say except when the circumstances call for them.  You may not say the word mayday unless there is danger of lost of life or property;  you may not say the word pan-pan unless there is a safety situation being reported.  You may use these words accompanied by the word relay if you believe you can reach the intended station where the one you have received may or can not.  Other than that, there are the calling and end of call procedures.  All VHF frequencies in marine use are simplex, that is, I talk then you talk.  After establishing contact, when you have finished your current communication you speak the word over to let the other end know that they can talk now.  When you are signing off, the word is out, and only the word out.  This is a disconnect.  I hope to never hear anyone with any radio procedure knowledge say "over and out" as this is contradictory.  Now isn't it interesting that some words are required?

On VHF, non-PG13 words are frowned upon.  In fact, if you persist, CCG can petition to have your license suspended pending an interview.  This is because this stuff is broadcast, the same as the Internet, if you didn't know.  People should always be polite, but an occasional flannel mouthed slip may be quickly forgotten.  So should it be with the broadcast media.

BTW, my son got his VHF Marine License when he was 11.  One of the youngest ever.

[Duke87 1,070]

Strictly speaking, the internet does not qualify as "broadcast". At least, it doesn't directly fall under any FCC jurisdiction. Only way they're involved is that any wireless router must conform to their regulations for devices that use radio waves.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Actually, I was thinking that the Internet is broadcast in the sense that it uses a datagram protocol that goes to all nodes in a subnet, and on from there depending on routing.  All packets are broadcast over the net until they find their destination.  Therefore it is as public as a radiated broadcast.  The FCC may take an interest in this if they ever notice.

[A Nonny Moose 8,262]

Actually, I was thinking that the Internet is broadcast in the sense that it uses a datagram protocol that goes to all nodes in a subnet, and on from there depending on routing.  All packets are broadcast over the net until they find their destination.  Therefore it is as public as a radiated broadcast.  The FCC may take an interest in this if they ever notice.