Re: Mountains Rush and Moore

From: Scott Hedrick (dinehnm_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 08/17/04 

Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 00:06:45 -0400

"Eric Chomko" <echomko_at_@polaris.umuc.edu> wrote in message
news:cfr1ma$2bd$1@news.ums.edu...
> What you fail to grasp is that whole industries are going overseas.

I grasp that just fine. Learn to adapt.

> : They should have managed their money better.
>
> Anyone in the st*** market from 1998-2002 can say the same damn thing!

With good reason.

> Hell, my 401K went down. Did yours actually go up during THAT time?

I don't have one. My investments are more diversified.

> : So, start a business in another field.
>
> Only if I leave the area and can retrain what I have here.

Do what it takes and whine less.

>
> : Many of
> : > those people have restorted to going into the mortgage and refinace
> : > industry.
>
> : Good for them! It can be challenging.
>
> ...and a big pain in the ass.

Oh, yeah! I let others handle that now. Been there, done that, got the
calculator. Plus, I had the advantage of not having to deal with other
lenders and developed a lot of bad habits.

> : > With interest rates going up and the wave of refinace having
> : > past with the rates having bottomed out two years ago, that industry
> : > has run its course WRT helping the economy as well as providing
interim
> : > jobs.
>
> : Time to start looking for something else.
>
> Yep, people can no longer expect to be in the same field for their whole
> career like it was in the 50s.

Or 60s. Or even 70s.

>You know that utopian times that you
> conservatives strive for.

Please provide some verifiable evidence for this, if you're not too busy
looking for evidence to support your claims about Bush being AWOL. For that
matter, I'm still waiting for you to answer my question about what the
Democratic Party has ever done for you.

Yeah, you must be more liberal minded when it
> comes to finding work as it tends to shift and move much faster these
> days.

I'm as liberal or conservative as I need to be. I find I have more success
finding employment when I spend less time whining about it and more time
becoming qualified for it.

> : > All we have is a housing value bubble that looks a lot like the
Dot-com
> : > stock market of 6-8 years ago.
>
> : A house is never worth any more than a ready and willing buyer is
willing to
> : pay at the moment asked.
>
> False! It is worth as much as a lender is willing to lend for it.

False! No buyer, no sale!

> Another damn thing that YOU are forgetting is the location in which one
> lives.

I haven't forgotten a thing.

>I bet you that if you move to the DC area and you would not be able
> to compete like you do where you are from.

I'd probably make even more money.

> On the same token, I bet I
> could take your damn job!

I'd be happy to consider selling my business to you.

But not to worry as you be ever so resourceful
> would simply find another job!

But of course. Or start another business in a different field.

> So, what this means in many cases is that people must relocate when they
> are focrced to take that lower paying job you are talking about just to be
> able to make ends meet.

Exactly. They learn to adapt.

>Loads of freedom in that concept!

Exactly! What a wonderful country this is!

> : > : France? Australia? Germany? Poland? Italy? Where are they? When did
they
> : > : *stop* being US allies?
> : >
> : > France? They hate us and we hate them.
>
> : Since when? There wouldn't be a US without France.
>
> Don't confuse Lafayette with all of France.

I don't. I recall the seemingly endless field of French supporters at the
most recent Normandy memorial.

> : All the rest are neutral at best and many of the
> : > people in those countries really don't like us.
>
> : You think so, huh? *You* sure haven't been watching the news.
>
> Hell they root against us at the Olympics!

Not surprising. Why wouldn't they want their own teams to win?

> : > : > Nice legacy.
> : >
> : > : Yes, I'd say Bush has done alright for himself and the country.
> : >
> : > You're blind.
>
> : I ignore the lies, you mean.
>
> You're blindedness is of the truth.

When it comes to the truth, I'm blind to anything else.

> : > Bush votes + Nader votes < Kerry
> : > votes.
>
> : I'm certain that all three will cast votes. Unlike yourself, I'm aware
that
> : there is no provision making any one vote count more or less than any
other.
> : The truth is: Bush vote = Nader vote = Kerry vote. That's part of the
> : greatness of this country.
>
> Here let me rephrase so even you get it this time:

I'd rather see your verifiable evidence about your claims about Bush being
AWOL.

> Bush vote totals + Nader vote totals < Kerry vote totals

You still haven't provided any evidence at all that any of their votes
counts more than any other.

> : Let's see your verifiable evidence. Let's also see the verifiable
evidence
> : that supports your belief that Bush could have fixed the intelligence
> : agencies within 8 months.
>
> Read my lips, "THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES WERE NEVER BROKEN".

A statement which conflicts with the verifiable facts.

>Well, if you don't like the media, then change
> it and stop bitching.

It's the liberals who are bitching. Their answer is the Al Franken show,
which is about to go off the air because it can't find sponsors. The people
*have* spoken.

> : >You are oblivious of the self-serving nature of
> : > this administration
>
> : Which makes them different than any other administration in what way?
>
> Well, other administrations never claimed to start a pre-emptive war on so
> little evidence and then give no-bid contracts to former employers.

So much for Somalia, eh?

> : > And you are hopelessly a Republican.
>
> : Once again, you are invited to provide verifiable evidence. Otherwise,
it's
> : just another lie on your part. No matter how often you tell a lie, it
> : doesn't become the truth. Even Clinton eventually learned that lesson.
>
> What lesson was that?

The one right in front of you. I'll spell it out *after* you've provided
your verifiable evidence as to my political affiliation.

> : > Bush can't even run the country
>
> : He seems to be doing it now, and well. He can do his job better on the
road
> : than Kerry. How's Kerry's Senate attendance record since he started
running?
>
> Bush's numbers are dropping in many key states like Ohio.

Which has nothing to do with how he's running the country. Doing the right
thing is not the same thing as doing what the polls say.

> : Why's that? Perhaps it's because the Republicans are too busy looking
out
> : for the country instead of trying to kiss Barbra Streisand's ass.
>
> Republicans are too busy looking out adter their own fortunes.

Which is the best thing for the country as a whole.

> : > : And how does the *Democratic Party* do that? I thought that was the
> : function
> : > : of Congress.
> : >
> : > The president creates the budget in which Congress votes on.
>
> : True- but that doesn't answer my question. What has the *Democratic
Party*
> : done for you?
>
> Kept the location of where I work from going to California after the GOP
> takeover in Congress for starters.

So, you have evidence that the *Democratic Party*, as opposed to Congress or
some other legislative body, did this? Do you work for the Democratic Party?
If not, then what was the authority of the Party to do so?

> : > : So, under what authority does the Democratic Party do these things?
> : >
> : > By being open to suggestion and not thinking that they have all the
> : > answers, inherently.
>
> : And the part of the Constitution that gives the Democratic Party that
> : authority would be...?
>
> The Constitution is ignored by the GOP.

That's nice. Not try answering the question I asked.

> : > He
> : > forgets who we works for! And WE are going to let him know about it
this
> : > fall.
>
> : Just like Tennessee let Gore know.
>
> No, W will win Texas, but a lot less of the other states he won in 2000.

Which doesn't change the fact that Gore couldn't even win his home state.

> : >You GOPers
>
> : Who else are you talking to? I thought you were replying to me.
>
> Other hard-head conservatives...what?

Such as? Once again, you've grouped me in with a political organization
without the least evidence.

> : > You might even lose the Senate.
>
> : It's not mine to begin with. It belongstotheAmericanPeople.Thatyou
> : think of it as a possession says a lot about you.
>
> I thought it belonged to the GOP?

There you go. The Senate, as with the House of Representative, belongs to
the people. It always has and always will. Neither the Republican Party nor
the Democratic Party have any authority there.

>What has the GOP done for you?

The very same thing the Democratic Party has done for you- NOTHING.

> : > : Ah, so you think Truman was an accountant, now.
> : >
> : > Sort of. But SOMEONE needed to do it!
>
> : How balanced were Truman's budgets?
>
> Deficits NEVER started to occur regularly until Nixon came into the White
> House.

That's nice. Now answer the question I asked.

 In fact, Bill Clinton has been the ONLY president to preside over a
> balanced budget since Nixon.

Not possible, as long as there is a national debt. As we've seen, that
"balanced budget" was completely imaginary.

> : > : Sounds like the Democratic run world, where you screw the people who
> : create
> : > : jobs and give to people too lazy to work.
> : >
> : > Sorry to hear that you are surrounded by lazy people.
>
> : Well, I let you hang around.
>
> I'd run circles around you, boy!

Just like a dog.

> I move at least as fast as you in a town that moves at least twice as fast
> as yours.

If you were as efficient as I am, you wouldn't need to move so fast.

> : What's the matter,
> : > not a good motivator?
>
> : Government aid is never a good motivator.
>
> Depends on the situation.

Not really.

> Isn't the space program effectively government
> aid?

Yes. That's part of the problem.

> Surely the NOAA satellites that provide us with hurricane data is good
> expense of government funds. Right?

Not really. If the government is doing it for free, there's no reason for
private entities to try.

> : The difference is, *Kerry* has made all sorts of unsubstantiated claims
> : about his service, much of which could be cleared up if he released his
> : records. So far, everything Bush has claimed has been shown to be true.
>
> Shown what?

His service. Unlike Kerry, who refuses to release his records. It's possible
that some of Kerry's records have been lost as well.

> Be specific. That book, "Not Fit to Serve", is pure anti-Kerry
> propaganda.

I haven't read it.

>It is far worse than Fahrenheit 911 because none of it is
> true.

Prove it. Make a point-by-point comparison and provide verifiable evidence.

>In F-911 you get to see W being W.

All the better.

> By
> : your past reasoning, Kerry is lying, because there are no records to
support
> : his claims. Let's see the records. For that matter, Mrs. Bush made her
tax
> : records available, why doesn't Mrs Kerry?
>
> : >It started with the medals over the White House lawn
>
> : *Kerry* said that he threw his medals away, a clear lie.
>
> : and now
> : > has gone with this smear book from swift boat captains and such.
>
> : Please provide verifiable evidence that the swift boat captains are
wrong.
>
> The project money has come from Texas and not anywhere else.

So?

The publisher
> is Regnery, which is a notorious right-wing propagandist.

And the New York Times is a liberal propagandist. That doesn't mean that it
doesn't occasionally manage to tell the truth.

The whole thing
> has the earmark of "smear" written all over it.

Sounds like a Democratic Party operation.

> : Well, *you* are the one hanging out the the Democrats, so you shouldn't
> : complain about their stench.
>
> Tell me what has been shown or told about W that didn't come right from
> the source?

You mentioned Moore's movie. He digitally altered a newspaper, who's to say
what else he altered.

> : > : > : >W is trying to make Iraq into another Vietnam.
> : > : >
> : > : > : Why? Please provide verifiable documentation.
> : > : >
> : > : > No exit strategy, just spend, spend, spend.
> : >
> : > : OK, and where will that document be located? Please provide a
verifiable
> : > : cite.
> : >
> : > It isn't in the White House where it belongs. Ask Richard Perle, HE
would
> : > know.
>
> : LaToya? Is that you?
>
> : Your claim *your* burden.
>
> PNAC. Look it up.

Nope. Your claim, your burden.

> : > : > : > : Prove it. The facts do not support any claim of being AWOL.
> : > : > : >
> : > : > : > The proof is in the fact that no records exist that state W
was in
> : > : > : > Alabama.
> : > : >
> : > : > : Sorry, it doesn't work that way. You said he was AWOL, please
> : provide
> : > : > : records that support that claim. A lack of records does not do
this.
> : > : >
> : > : > Sure it does. No records = no service.
> : >
> : > : Ah, so, if the records get destroyed, history gets altered, right?
If I
> : were
> : > : to take someone's service record and destroy it, they would suddenly
> : vanish
> : > : from photos taken at the time?
> : >
> : > Yes, and all very covenient for W.
>
> : So you believe that, because there are no records, that W has actually
> : vanished from photos taken at the time? Sorta like "Back to the Future"?
>
> W wishes he had
> Back to the Furture" powers. W missed his last physical and was grounded.
> That was the beginning of his be ingAWOL.

Still waiting for you to provide documentation supporting your claims he was
AWOL. Do you have any reference to any paper from any branch of the military
in which Bush was charged with being AWOL?

> : Trying to put all the focus of military
> : > service on Kerry only tries to shift the focus of W's lack of service.
>
> : So, if I were to take someone's service jacket at random and burn it,
then
> : time would magically alter itself and that person would never have
served?
>
> There would be other records.

Always?

>Reocrds that one could get from the FOIA.

Even if they were burned, or destroyed in a flood?

> Seems when one does that with W's, they are told that his records were
> destroyed.

SO what's Kerry's excuse?

> : All because the records of that time were destroyed? Are you saying the
> : records themselves are magical, and hold the key to time? What about
people
> : who are involved in covert actions where there are no records of the
actual
> : action- that's just imaginary?
>
> But like the JFK assassination, you can't cover it ALL up.

Really? That's interesting, because my brother occasionally works in
salvaging WW2 aircraft. There are plenty of cases where he couldn't identify
who was flying a given plane because the records have been lost. By your
reasoning, the plane flew itself, since without records, there couldn't have
been a pilot.

Evidence has a
> way of leaking out, even the best covert operation.

Except evidence about Kerry's military records seems to be secret.

> : Proof that he was there. Now let's see proof of your AWOL charge.
>
> He uses the service for a dental work yet his CO can't recall ever seeing
> him.

So? Do you have official documentation from the military at the time
charging Bush with being AWOL?

>What kind of crap is that? Even for the NG that is pretty lax. Face
> it, W treated the NG like school and dropped out.

That's nice. Now let's see your *evidence*.

> : > : > : After
> : > : > : all, there are also many people whose service records were
destroyed
> : as
> : > : a
> : > : > : result of fire- does that mean that they didn't really serve
after
> : all?
> : > : >
> : > : > Name one person other than W that had military records destroyed.
Can
> : you?
> : >
> : > : As a matter of fact, I seem to recall a plane carrying servicemen
*and
> : their
> : > : records* that crashed in, I believe, Nova Scotia, in the 80s.
> : Identifying
> : > : the bodies was a challenge precisely because their service records
had
> : been
> : > : destroyed. This caused the military to change their habit of sending
> : service
> : > : jackets along with the people being transferred.
> : >
> : > : More to the point, I've had difficulties in finding the records of
> : certain
> : > : Korean war veterans, because of a fire at a records storage
facility.
> : > : Storing records wasn't- and still isn't- a big priority.
> : >
> : > Way to convenient for W.
>
> : So what's Kerry's excuse for not releasing his own records? Or his
wife's
> : tax return?
>
> What records does Kerry have that haven't been released?

His military service record. He claims he was in Cambodia. If his records
were released, he'd be able to point to them to back up his claim. The
verifiable facts show that, unless he ran off on his own, he never got
closer than 50 miles to the border.

His wife's tax
> returns that are not released are only the part related to her
> contributions.
 And if memory serves -hey, wait- YOU should know this! Does
> she have to disclose where her tax deductable constrabutions go to? IS
> THAT neccessarily part of the public record?

She doesn't *have* to disclose anything.

> : > : > : Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
> : > : >
> : > : > In the case of W's silverspoon-life it does.
> : >
> : > : Carl Sagan would disagree.
> : >
> : > Carl Sagan would support Kerry not W.
>
> : Prove it. Ask him.
>
> He's dead. That is why I said "would" and not "does".

Then how do you know what Sagan *would* do?

> : I guess I'll have to ask it again- you claimed that polls back you up
about
> : my being a right winger- what polls are those?
>
> "Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck..."

So, you conducted a poll of ducks, then? That explains a great many things
about you.

> : Still waiting for your verifiable evidence to support your claims about
my
> : party affiliation. Changing the subject won't make it go away.
>
> Okay, what party are you related to , if not the Republicans?

Why do I need to be a member of any party?

> : Yes, telling the truth *is* a characteristic of being on the right. It's
> : also one of my characteristics.
>
> Do you think being right is the same as telling the truth?

Being *correct* is the same as telling the truth.

> : >You are the type of scientist
>
> : Please provide verifiable evidence that I am a scientist.
>
> Okay, you are more like Igor than Frankenstein...

That's nice. Now provide your evidence.

> : > And what do you do as one that is self-employed?
>
> : I'm a writer, among other things.
>
> Yes, yes, I saw the list...
>
> I wonder if you would make it out of your own town.

Since my "town" is the entire country, I don't see the need.

Quantcast