Re: Is this sci.physics, or by accident, am I reading posts on some crackpt political nesgroup.

On Jul 4, 4:42 pm, Fred Kasner <fkas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
hhc...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jul 3, 3:55 pm, Fred Kasner <fkas...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
hhc...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jul 2, 1:11 am, DB <a...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
hhc...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
The message is simple, but if you post here involves other than on the
subject of physics, or a topic closely related, everyone here will
ignore your post.  Worse too, if you continue to post off topic on
sci.physics, it can be reported to your ISP which usually results in
your Usenet posting capabilities to be totally suspended.
I would like to post about my very negative opinions of certain
political candidates, but notice that I have not chosen to do so on a
once respected scientific newsgroup.
On sci.physics, crackpots and politics finatics are not welcomed, and
really shouldn't post here.
Harry C.
Who are you talking to Harry?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Actually Dan, I'm speaking to anyone who posts or reads this
newsgroup.
Given your background, this should come as not a surprise.
For myself, if I wish to make a political statement or anything but
something having to do with hydrogen, I move to a different
Newsgroup.I have enough sense not to post my, lets say, anti-Obama
views in a sci. newgroup. Other posters here appear to be children
lacking any degree of self restraint and common sense.
Frankly Dan, I have to wonder if some of these posters are as house
broken as is my dog. No disrespect to you Dan, but a generation of
liberal upbringing has created some kids who know no rules, and who in
their entire lives will produce no benefit for humanity.
'Nuff said!
Harry C.
"some kids"? How many, Harry? And do I and my generation whose parents
were generally quite liberal fit your political diatribe? I am afraid
your prism is used to decrease the spectrum of light on the subject
rather than spread it out. And no, I don't forgive you for injecting
your political bias into a science NG.
Fred
FK- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Fred, as you well know I make no effort to hide my social and
political viewpoints, nor do you. You lean to the left, while I to the
right. My particular political leanings come as a result of my
education and personal observations. In fact, I don't even know what
the political leanings of my parents were, although like everyone else
in the country, they loved FDR and Harry Truman, both liberal
democrats.

Let me explain where my political and social bias originates, and I
can identify two major factors that shape my political and social
opinions.

First, my heart has a liberal orientation...that is to help others to
improve their lives and elevate themselves in society. That's
certainly a noble and altruistic goal.  Unfortunately, it is rarely if
ever realized, not because it is not a noble goal, but the liberals
don't seem to realize how to achive it.  Fred, as a conservative, I
have to tip my hat in respect to Harry Truman, who gave the order to
drop two nukes on Japan at a cost of possibly hundreds of thousands of
lives, but on the positive side of that equation his decision likely
saved millions of lives on both sides of WWII. That took courage and
strength of character -- indeed, I am thankful that I didn't have to
make that call. I also regard Jimmy Carter with great regard, who is
about as liberal as you could ever hope for. I believe that it was
Carter's fellow democrats that actually gave Carter the shaft!

OK, now here is what I see today. I see those noble liberal goals
resulting in terrible results when they are actually implemented,
because the liberals appear not to consider the ramifications of their
legislative actions. For example, it would be illegal for an inner-
city school to provide special attention to black or even white
children raised in a home without a father or adequate parential
control and imposed restrictions. So, to fit in with his peers, the
child joins a gang, ultimately commits a felony, and goes to prison at
taxpayer's expense. If and when he is released, the odds are that he
will do the same thing and end up back again in prison.

Fred, when you and I were small children, we both recognized what the
rules were, and to violate these rules held, and often involves
painful consequences when violated.  That is illegal today, thanks to
liberal well intended motives. Neither of us has spent time in a
prison as a result of this early learning experience, not because
either of us are that moral, but because we understand the
consequences of our actions. In a liberal environment, many kids don't
learn these basic concepts.

Cutting to the chase, I suppose that I acquired my conservative
orientation while an undergraduate student at Drexel.  Strangely,
while taking a required course in economics. On the first lecture, our
assignment was to read and digest Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations".
As a physics major and somewhat a nerd, reading this book opened my
eyes to what actually drives commerce and ultimately  how nations
become wealthy or sink into slime.

Reading that one book gave me a bit of convervative insight into the
problems that the US is now experiencing. First of all, you never
should sell your "cash cow"!!!!

American's did sell the "cash cow", starting around 1950 and extending
throgh today today. That "cash cow" was earlier known as trade secrets
and is now labeled "intellectual property or patent rights". So now a
whole gang of people are walking around today wondering why the
foreign nations can compete wih us on semiconductors, computers,
television sets, steel, heavy equipment. etc.  "Experts" are now
sitting in their offices trying to figure out why jobs are decreasing
and our economy is a disaster.  The evidently have no clue.

For us older guys with a window of over 50 years, it's pretty obvious.
This is something that we conserative have caused, and the nexus is
the Harvard School of  Business which teaches its students to maximize
short term profits while ignoring the long term.

this strategy has made many capitalists very wealthy. at the mere
expense of thousand of workers losing their jobs.

So Fred, you now know that I can make an argument on both sides.

Not that you asked, but regarding the likely candidates, my view is
that neither is qualified to hold office.  Haopefully, at the party
conventtions, a dark horse willl emerge...but that is unlikely.

Harry C.

That next to last conjecture is one with which I heartily concur. I hold
no brief for the excesses of either end of the political spectrum. On
one side is class warfare engendered by hate and envy. On the other is
greed without commensurate generosity of spirit. I try to find a balance
that serves the best interest of the continuation of the Republic. I
find that capitalism serves the interests of that body better than
unfettered socialism (save our generally acceptable socialism of
schools, national parks, postal system, and others that are anathema to
the far right. But my real concern is that we have a far right that has
no generosity of spirit that controls the Supreme Court and the levers
of fairness of the government. And so I gamble that the Dem will learn
enough on the job to govern well but fear it will only lead to a further
reaction on the part of the electorate and further entrench political
reaction in the Supreme Court. The actions of the court are the one long
term feature of our governmental system. And a reactionary court is what
I fear the most. Stupidity on the part of Bush Jr. has cost us much in
the way we respect and view our country as well as the way we are viewed
around the world. And the commitment to short term greed has drained our
technical prowress and even our commitment to defense of our country and
its best interests. But what can you expect from a person who used
family influence to avoid Viet Nam and even avoided his duty in the
National Guard. He has made a mockery of national leadership and hurt
the ability of the Republican Party to offer a reasonable alternative to
even a modestly liberal Democrat. I believe that a party that brought us
emancipation and abolition of slavery can't be all wrong for all time.
FK- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Fred, I will not even attempt to dipute anything that you have said it
this post.

I do have major fault to pick with the both leaders of our two major
political parties that have permitted this travesty to take place.

Feel free to consider me an 'old fart' Fred, but I rather like the way
that the presidential candidates emerged from some consensus at the
respective party conventions, where media created images played nearly
no role in candidate selections, and certainly not the heavily
incluence primary elections, because I don't remember these
distractions even existing.

I was pretty young at that time, but as I remember watching it on
black and white TV, nearly every state went in to the convention
promoting their 'favorite son' candidate. Sometimes even 20-50 votes
took place before a candidate was selected. This was because, in those
days, the US operated as a Republic, not a Democracy.

The system managed to works quite well, although it was sometime
lengthy. Great leaders like FDR and Lincoln emerged as their party
nominees.

Fred, I have to ask you this sensitive quetion. Would you see any
chance that a man like FDR in the face of a hard core media blitz
could emergy the winner in one of today's primary fights. Or, for
that matter, Harry Truman as his vice presidential nominee?

Not damn likely, but these to arugably the greatest presidents that
the US had during the 20th Century.

I give Reagan a great deal of credit, but I do remember that the night
he nominated George Bush to be his vice-president, I do remember Black
and White TV images of the press going to the door of Bush's hotel
suite and waking him up to get an interview. After repeated poundings
on his hotel room door, Bush finally emerged in a nightrobe, and after
a few brief comments told the press and media to 'get lost' and went
back to bed.

Older readers remember this. For me, while Reagon in my mind ended the
Cold War, and I really like his style of management (Right, thank you
Nancy, bet you didn't realize that anyone noticed), I have alway
considered Reagans selection of a running mate to have been rather
poor.

Again, older readers know exactly what I mean, and why. Since those
years, things have turned somewhat downhill. We seem desperately to be
attempting to convert a country founded as a Republic into a Popular
Democracy. This is a damn dumb move, although it sound just great.
The fact is they thoughout recorded history every Democracy in history
has failed due to the same reason.

Fred Kastner may may or may not like me for saying this, but the
falacy of Democracy is that it places ultimate value on one person
equalling one vote. Think about this a little, and it reveals what
this leads to. Note that a truly democrative election place nothing on
the education of the voter, his I.Q, or if he/she even understand what
the issues are.

That's the current problem with the primary elections. Where a
football hero to run for election, with sufficient finanancial
backing, whe could become a presidential candidate.

Ok' I've ranted on enough on this topic. Unless things change on the
presidential slate, this is why I will not vote in the upcoming
election, or vot with a "write in" for none of the above. I
personally view both of the leading presidental candidate is being
equally bad for the US, although in different ways.



.

Relevant Pages

  • Going for History Tuesday, March 31, 2009
    ... inviting the people to make it with him, to bring back ?true democracy?. ... Thaksin is only half there, reserving his fatal revelations only for the Privy ... free ride through history for their more radical politics. ... Since the 1980s liberals and statists have ...
    (soc.culture.thai)
  • From Europe.... (1)
    ... with that English publication. ... 'I really think the problem is that we liberals are in general far ... So the tendency to stigmatise populist politics as a symptom ... democracy and an 'authoritarian' and 'irrational' working class ...
    (soc.culture.baltics)
  • Re: Support the Troops - Neocon style
    ... And because I despise liberals - simply because they were elected and ... You treat politics like a sport. ... bunch of cry baby surrender happy pieces of shit. ... Of course I support our Democracy ...
    (misc.survivalism)
  • Re: Drop the haka ?
    ... according to you politics is all about calling people 'liberals' ... I believe in the rule of law and democracy, ... Yes Didge - by then he will have wheeled out his favourite phrase at you - ...
    (rec.sport.rugby.union)
  • Re: I finally figured out why Fox News appeals to Bush supporters
    ... opposing point of view than conservatives. ... So Rush, O'Reilly, etc. have a built-in advantage because liberals and ... Entertainment Reveals: ... the subjects of politics and entertainment. ...
    (rec.music.artists.springsteen)