Jump to content

Michael Hardner

Senior Member
  • Posts

    42,765
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    93

Everything posted by Michael Hardner

  1. DogOnPorch, Thanks for the link. I appreciate it when these debates have some facts to discuss. As you've shown, there's no question that we're targeted by Muslim terrorist organizations. Some questions: Are any American (Canadian) Muslims involved in terrorism ? Yes, they are and no amount of politically correct propaganda can change the fact that there are Canadian Muslims who will sign up with such organizations. Your link has shown that. Do Muslims as a group in Canada support such acts to any significant degree ? I haven't seen evidence of that. If you have some, post it and the facts may change my position. Are these threats so serious as to threaten our democracy ? I don't think so. Even 9/11 didn't threaten the democracy of the US. Do these act convince Western Muslims to support terrorism ? Again, we didn't see significant support for terrorism from American Muslims after 9/11. Will reducing Muslim immigration eliminate or significantly reduce the threat of attacks ? I don't see how it will. A complete quarantine of Muslim visitors, with a mass exile would probably achieve this though. Would you suggest that as an approach ?
  2. Jerry, Seriously what is the DEAL with your posts ? As usual, no cite, no reference. Will you provide one this time ? Hmmm... the Muslims in our countries have acted no differently than Catholics who objected to Mapplethorpe photos, or unflattering depictions of Mary. So what is your point ? Should they shut up because you want them to ? Why are you holding them to a different standard ? This is another haphazard link you're making between extreme Muslims in other countries and Muslims here. After years of posting about Muslim immigration, we have yet to have any opponents of Muslim immigration (which is what they are) provide any evidence that Muslim immigration is a threat to our democracy. Jerry's post here is another example of that gap. But keep trying...
  3. Wow, not the quote I got: Could Rush have lied again ? Does Rush lie to please his followers who love to follow him ( a liar ) ? Stl Today.com Rush got the bum's Rush...
  4. Great post Kimmy -> this made me laugh 'OL'...
  5. Well, it's kind of funny but I also think that I don't want to hear about gaffes unless they're very funny , or we have a Mel Lastman/Dan Quayle scale goofball politician, and in that case he should have his own forum.
  6. Shady, I guess you know now how normal people feel about Limbaugh. Fergie and Lopez would have to write some pretty controversial lyrics to evoke that kind of protest. The fact was that Rush denigrated Donovan McNabb on national television due to his race and nothing more. Rush is the equivalent of the drunk racist uncle you invite to your wedding but pray he won't say anything.
  7. And - what's the deal with airline food ?
  8. Jerry, Ok. Given that the main course was a giant roast beef for Republican investment firms, I guess the dems will take their treats where they can get them. Ok - so all of this is off to the side from what we were discussing. As such, I'll take all of your post as a concession that it is indeed crazy to call Obama a communist. With regards to your post, there's a lot there. Some of it makes sense, some doesn't "(ruined American credibility with thug states" ? Is that something that you would want ? ) and lots of it comes from that Right-Wing 3D Viewmaster that the Rushians love to look through all the time and pretend is reality. Implosion ? Hardly. When you look at the economy, and the degree of change that Obama is pushing for I'm surprised he's still as popular as he is.
  9. Shady, You're right, and I knew this when I posted but I projected your opinion from the 'takeover of private sector' comment. Sorry if I offended you, although my assertion isn't that far from what you posted. Fair enough. I rescind my comment. Point taken. I would note that GW Bush got the deficit ball rolling, and Obama is puffing it up like a giant Jiffy Pop popcorn box.
  10. River, A very astute comment, but only 50 years ago new media were suspected of being fads as I said above.
  11. Eyeball, They thought television was a bad. I remember hearing somebody say "you can't do chores while watching TV !". Modern Democracy has never worked with any technology as well as print technology, which was cutting edge in the 19th century when it was born. Even the telegraph had a negative impact on democracy. Radio made Hitler a star. And Nixon beat Kennedy in the debate. By mid 21st century, we may actually figure out ways to make democracy work with current technology. New web technologies now adopt usability studies early in their inception. If those practices could be adapted to study and project long-term effects of new media on society, then we would have solved a major human problem. One thing we constantly do is assume that because democracy allows participation by all, we need to do everything in our power to force participation by all - including internet voting and especially ridiculous mandatory voting laws enacted in some parts.
  12. Mo, You said "They nearly broke their hip trying to be hip". I got a chuckle over that one.
  13. Well, you were right about Dose.ca, Morris. Maybe you're right about this, I'm not sure. In any case, if I have any questions about the Dose, I'll know that you're the expert.
  14. Shady, It no less Star Warsy to refer to Obama as a socialist, communist or what have you. Public Healthcare has been on the radar since the 1960s, and the fact that it's finally coming to American fifty years later doesn't mean that Stalin has won. Keep in mind that the private sector bailouts we're facing were started by GW Bush and were largely seen as a necessary measure, and had bi-partisan support except for some political grandstanding here and there. Keep 'em coming, though. Maybe if conservatives continue to argue their points like a Wookie, or worse - Rush Limbaugh - perhaps people will start realize that something is severely wrong with political dialogue today.
  15. On THIS THREAD jdobbin says the internet will be the hula hoop. Do you think so ? Are there still people who think that the web is just a fad ? Answer truthfully - the Twitter bird is watching !
  16. Shady, That's science fiction. During the last election, Layton proposed a corporate tax of 22%, which is lower than the full US marginal rate of 35%. I love to discuss things with realistic and well informed conservatives. Both of them. The rest of you are shadow boxing with socialist bogeymen, I'm afraid to say.
  17. Naomi, It's not that bizarre when you know of the power of that company, whom most people haven't heard of. Brown & Root was a smallish construction firm in Texas when they met up with a congressman named Lyndon Johnson, and created a political-economic juggernaut that would have arguably the most underrated impact on American life possible. And this cuts across right and left politics too, as LBJ brought in the Civil Rights Act, expanded the space program as well as the Viet Nam war, and created the War on Poverty as well as many social programs in the US that exist today. A lot of people talk about conspiracies, as if great power needs to be hidden, but it doesn't. The power that these people had is part of public record, but just not known...
  18. MC, There's nothing to suggest the government wants to kill its people. This is science fiction you have in your mind right now.
  19. eyeball, Ban alcohol ? Tobacco ? Coffee ? Do you want to see a revolution ? I'd prefer to create some kind of community that could work towards getting people off of these substances in the long term, and mitigate the attendant risks of that lifestyle in the short term.
  20. eyeball How do we prod the populace ? We are the populace, so we need to do it ourselves for a start, right here and in every day conversation. When you hear somebody start a statement with "statistics show..." then ask them some basic questions so that they know that you're not a sucker. I'm discouraged that you seem to want to wait for the government to do something that's not in its best interest to do. It's HARDER for them to manage government if we're informed, because then they have to do real work rather than just issue press releases about how great everything is.
  21. Toadbrother beat me to it. I'm sure they used to blame things on eclipses before we smartened up.
  22. eyeball, How often ? Often. Why ? Because it works. Setting up central committees to tell us the truth doesn't work as well as informing ourselves of what it is. This is a do-ocracy, i.e. yo u have to do it yourself. Learn what bad statistics are and point them out, soon others will do the sam.
  23. eyeball, If I was a hopeless alcoholic who couldn't do anything about it, I might welcome it. To a certain degree, an addict gives up on a normal life and chooses his substance as his life. The government seems to have arbitrary perspectives on certain types of vices - gambling, sex, tobacco, drugs and alcohol. For some of them, they tolerate it, for some they legalize it and tax it, and for others they ban it. All of these vices are negative types of escapism, IMO, and should be cautiously managed, with a realistic general welfare being the guideline.
  24. Pliny I don't think "appease" is the right word. I do think that the public needs to be continually told that crime is on the decrease. Fear mongering by politicians is too attractive an option to getting cheap votes, and we need to be wary of taking the low road like that. People need to understand statistics better - that would both prevent their misuse, and also would allow us to use them properly. EVERY time somebody brings up statistics, there should be questions about the methodology, who backed it, and what was concluded - especially if a faulty cause-effect relationship is implied. That being said, there's no reason that the public should accept any violence in society at all and they absolutely have the right to expect punishment for violent offenses.
  25. eyeball, Has anyone suggested an approach whereby people in this program are kept under more strict control ? It appears to me that having the affliction of drug addiction requires you to be pretty much constantly supervised.
×
×
  • Create New...