HELP FIGHT ADULTERY! - HELP US FIGHT THE GOOD FIGHT!!! HELP!
EJK
Anyone like to bet this poster is female?
Sounds like she needs a good "Gung-Ho" from a "Gung-Ho Vietnam Veteran".
SKEPTIC wrote:
>
> ADULTERY?
>
> Gee, wonder how many vietnam veterans committed adultery while on their tour
> of duty?? Remember all those 'reunions' soldiers had with the vietnam kids
> they fathered? Wonder how many of those guys should be investigated, and then
> have all their penisons,medical care,checks,ribbons, and medals taken from
> them?
>
> Adultery is suppose to be a violation of military law, therefore we should
> leave no stone unturned on this issue...
>
> We should interrogate all vietnam,korean,world war II veterans to see if they
> committed adultery while in combat or on base...Perhaps when the vietnam vets
> received R&R in laos?
>
> Why can't we investigate the veterans? Many were married before they shipped
> out..Many hired prostitutes while in the countries of vietnam,korea,etc..
>
> We should start an investigation, and start having trials and putting people
> on notice..
>
> NO ONE is above the law , right?
> I'd bet $1000 people such as 'hackworth,swatrzkopf,powell' committed adultery
> in vietnam/korea.. Anyone want to take this bet?
>
> As for needing proof...
> What about all those kids from korea and vietnam that FLOODED america in the
> 1980's looking for 'daddy'? Do you people remember those reunions? It was on
> the news everyday for almost a month. I even remember comedians telling jokes
> about which congressman looked more like the kids getting off the plane..You
> remember those jokes? I do !
>
> Clinton might have committed adultery, but at least he didn't violate military
> law like most of those 'gung-ho Vietnam Veterans' did...
>
> BTW, The Military law makes to distinctions regarding adultery. Simply the
> act of adultery is a violation, no matter who it was done with..
> Even if a vietnam/korean veteran committed adultery with a vietnamese
> prostitute or a subordinate's wife, the law is clear that adultery is
> adultery...
>
> So, Who is ready to start sending letters to congress/senate/president to open
> a huge investigation into adultery during the 'vietnam,korean wars'??
>
> Who will join me in fighting the good fight, in fighting adultery in the
> military?
> Who will help me to get these people to justice?
> Who will be fair,honest,and not have a double-standard?
> Who among you is not '2-faced' when it comes to the law?
> Who among you is willing to be consistent???
>
> Who among you??? Who?
> Join Me please..
>
> FIGHT ADULTRY
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Morals - A set of rules based on what was agreed acceptable in
> a past generation of people:
> Laws - A prescribed set of rules people with power, money and
> overall good looks create to keep poor, powerless and ugly in line.
> Ethics - An Unchanging set of rules that have stood the test of time.
> Common Sense - Non-genetic knowledge accumulated through learned experiences.
> -------------------------------------------------------
--
E.J.Kay
Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the leather
straps.
cl...@silverlink.net
I think the President will be inclined to give us a pardon.
Clarence Land
DaNang 70-71
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
Kim
Re the big scarlet A: Should A counseling be included in HMO
treatments or costs? Where are the details of the HMO policies
of public servants so those who pay for them can see what
they are paying for? California and Texas regulate HMOs. Congress
is considering a bill.
Jim Wise
on again? Or . . .You're just another Coleman troll.
We should trim some headers out our responses.
--
Jim Wise
USMC, 1st FSR, Danang, 69/70
Semper Fi
CWL # 69
(To reply by email remove the "*" from my address)
remove the ZZ to reply
It was a dark and stormy night in alt.war.vietnam when
SKE...@REPUBLICAN.agenda.com (SKEPTIC) uttered these fateful
words:
> ADULTERY?
>
> Gee, wonder how many vietnam veterans committed adultery while on their tour
> of duty?? Remember all those 'reunions' soldiers had with the vietnam kids
> they fathered? Wonder how many of those guys should be investigated, and then
> have all their penisons,medical care,checks,ribbons, and medals taken from
> them?
>
With all this illicit sex occuring in the military, why did Bill
Clinton work so hard to avoid serving?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Frank Vaughan "Spectre Gunner" baguio (at) ix.netcom.com
Vietnam Veteran -- AC-130E Spectre Gunships
16th Special Operations Squadron (USAF)
"We were winning when I left."
Visit my Spectre Gunship Tribute page at: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/8758/index.html
Please direct all junk e-mail to my little buddy Phill who uses the address: vete...@pacbell.net
Al Zeller
SKEPTIC wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Jun 1997 05:57:11 GMT, ZZba...@ix.netcom.com (remove the
> ZZ to
> reply) typed:
>
> >It was a dark and stormy night in alt.war.vietnam when
> >SKE...@REPUBLICAN.agenda.com (SKEPTIC) uttered these fateful
> >words:
> >
> >Clinton work so hard to avoid serving?
>
> are Afraid I'm sure. You are a better man than me after all.
Uh... Who give's a fuck?
Al Zeller
B 2/12 1st Cav
65-66
cwl#212
HOLLIS6475
Uh... Who give's a fuck?
Al Zeller
B 2/12 1st Cav
65-66
cwl#212
Well Al,
I would say Flynn and slick Willie gives a fuck.
The poster should have sent it to them.
Hollis
Lee Parsons
>Oh, BTW. Didn't Bill Clinton try to avoid the Paula Jones suit on the
>grounds that he was the Commander in Chief of the military and therefore
>was on active duty and protected from legal suits until he was out of
>office?
>
>I mean ol' Bill wouldn't be trying to apply a double Bubba standard, would
>he?
Not in this case. The alleged offense occured before he was in office.
The cases recently handled by the services were for people on active
duty.
>Hmmmm . . . Yup! I think EVERYONE in the military should be prosecuted if
>they committed adultery, without exception;-)
>
>Jill E. Deel
>vale...@iwaynet.net
Good for you. So what did this have to do with Vietnam?
Jim Calbreath
Hey skeptic,
I answered your survey and have turned myself in to the Inspector
General for summary execution, and as my last act prior to my internment
and the administration of the "final solution" I will now ask you a
question or two.
When you were a little boy lying in bed late at night did Mr Happy ever
quietly call out your name? Did the memories of Aunt Sally and her
daring two-piece that she wore at the pool invade your thoughts? Did you
by chance fall prey to it's siren song and give the Bulbous Boy a stroke
or two? And as those things often do, did you finish the job that you
started? Did you ever; Lope the Mule, wring the chicken's neck, did you
do the deed with Five-Finger Faye? What kind of a lie did you then tell
your Mommy to cover your "tracks"?
Well if you answered yes to any those questions I'm afraid that You will
have to turn yourself into the pope because you have sinned! You are a
dirty wrotten sinner who has gone against the word of the bible
concerning the "spilling of your own seed". No amount of groveling or
begging of forgiveness will erase the deed that you have done, that
assumes that you only did it once. Nor does it matter that you were a
young boy answering the hormonal call of nature, as you have told us
there is no excuse.
Kiss your little tush good-bye, you have sinned against all that I hold
holy and now you have to be punished (doesn't the thought just give you
a little stiffey?) It's off to the vatican for you, don't worry it'll
only hurt the first time or two. I know that a man like you who spouts
drivel and dogma to us will do the right thing by turning yourself in
for the deserved punishment that your acts have earned.
Please obey the rules of society and the writtings of the bible, it is
now your moral duty. How does that shoe fit?
Yours in Ignominy,
Jim the Just
Your Pal... SAL
From what I can gather...
Yes, you are to... both!
Semper Fi....
/\
_/\| |/\_
\ /
>____ <
/
CWL # 9 1/2 ('cause I never was quite a 10 !)
The Guy Who Puts The Lights Out...
...After The Fat Lady Has Sung
Your Pal,
SAL ( AKA: DISBO )
" I'm gonna speak my mind...
...'cause I've got nothing else to lose! "... S.I. Hayakawa
SKEPTIC <SKE...@REPUBLICAN.agenda.com> wrote in article
<33a992ab...@snews.zippo.com>...
> MILITARY RULES AND REGULATIONS.
>
> Answer the following question honestly please.
>
> 1. Am I just a clueless spamming pound-cake-eating fuckhead with a
> so-so education and a highly inflated opinion of hisself or;
>
> 2. Am I a pimple on a wart on a hemorrhoid on Hillary's foul smelling
> fecal covered rectum?
>
> Whatcha dink?
>
xona
If you are reading this, you are.
xona
gra...@netrom.com
In article <33a72a64...@news.concentric.net>,
SKE...@REPUBLICAN.agenda.com (SKEPTIC) wrote:
> Are You INSANE? Take this test..
>
> 1.Cutting taxes is ALWAYS a good idea?
no, taxes keep roads from crumbling and keeps children educated.
> 2.The Government is covering up information about Aliens?
not really....
> 3.AREA51 is the site where alien bodies had an autopsy?
no.
> 4.AIDS was created in a Government lab?
aids was created in people who had sex with monkeys in africa
> 5.WELFARE is an evil tool used to make people dependent?
Yes and no, i think welfare should be used to help get people back
on their feet. It should not become a permanent career.
> 6.The US Spends more on foreign aid than any other category?
probably
> 7.We need to stop immigration because it is killing out country?
nope
> 8.More people come to this country now than in the past?
No
> 9.The constitution is based on the Bible?
Almost all works of literature and politics take SOME cues from the Bible
> 10.Sometimes our government plants listening devices in babies?
that'd cost money, our governmant is too cheap.
> 11.The United Nations runs the USA.?
no.
> 12.Black Helicopters is a serious issue.?
probably not, ive never seen one
.
> 13.CPU's have special devices in them to store information about people?
Only intel machines
> 14.The Number 666 is important and should be avoided at all cost?
no, its a joke.
> 15.Atheist are evil, sick people and should be avoided at all cost?
definately not, i myself am an agnostic and i believe that i should
do as i please, as long as it does not hurt others. I also believe that
there are people who ARE in organized religions who come home from their
services and forclose on peoples mortgages and do other such things. Evil
is determined within an individual , not their beliefs.
> 16.Homosexuals are bad people?
nope
> 17.People on welfare are simply lazy people?
some....
> 18.Unemployed People are just too lazy to find a job?
some are, some just can't find one...
> 19.Organized Religion is good and never harms anyone or anything?
organized religion sucks.
> 20.Christians are good people and can do no wrong?
heh....dont get me started
> 21.Religious people always have the nations best interest in mind?
no , only their own.
> 22.There should be limits to what consenting adults should be allowed to do?
nope, its their bodies, not the government's or the Pope's
> 23.Only a married man and woman should be allowed to have sex?
definately not.
> 24.Pornography is evil and should against the law?
Its degrading to all the participants, but its their choice what to do .
> 25.Christian Moral Values should be a requirement to become president?
NO!
>
> If you answered yes to 5 to 14 Questions: Get Help, there is still time!!
> If you answered yes to 15 to 20 Questions: admit yourself to a hospital, time
> is wasting!
> If you answered yes to more than 20 questions: COMMIT SUICIDE IMMEDIATLEY!,
> you are beyond being helped and should do yourself and others the favor of
> doing yourself in.
>
>
> *** If you answered NO to most every question, you are a good person and
> understand the constitution.
> you are a great person, and have many friends that love you.
>
> P . s . If this survey angered you then get a life soon.
> NOTE: Making people angry was the purpose of this survey, and if you're angry
> then the project was a success!
>
> Thanks for playing..
DA MAN
Are You INSANE? Take this test..
1.Cutting taxes is ALWAYS a good idea?
2.The Government is covering up information about Aliens?
3.AREA51 is the site where alien bodies had an autopsy?
4.AIDS was created in a Government lab?
5.WELFARE is an evil tool used to make people dependent?
6.The US Spends more on foreign aid than any other category?
7.We need to stop immigration because it is killing out country?
8.More people come to this country now than in the past?
9.The constitution is based on the Bible?
10.Sometimes our government plants listening devices in babies?
11.The United Nations runs the USA.?
12.Black Helicopters is a serious issue.?
13.CPU's have special devices in them to store information about people?
14.The Number 666 is important and should be avoided at all cost?
15.Atheist are evil, sick people and should be avoided at all cost?
16.Homosexuals are bad people?
17.People on welfare are simply lazy people?
18.Unemployed People are just too lazy to find a job?
19.Organized Religion is good and never harms anyone or anything?
20.Christians are good people and can do no wrong?
21.Religious people always have the nations best interest in mind?
22.There should be limits to what consenting adults should be allowed to do?
23.Only a married man and woman should be allowed to have sex?
24.Pornography is evil and should against the law?
25.Christian Moral Values should be a requirement to become president?
If you answered yes to 5 to 14 Questions: Get Help, there is still time!!
Andrew Gilbert
DA MAN <DA...@fartswell.net> wrote in article
<3425e9f1....@news.concentric.net>...
Hey Dude, If you will give me your address, I'll send you the airfare to my
hometown. I wasnt my son to meet you. I want him to see what he'll grow up
like if he doesn't quit "choking his chicken" all the time.
Chris Anderson
DA MAN wrote:
>
> Are You INSANE? Take this test..
Are you a Bleeding Heart Liberal? Take this test..
1. Is it a good idea to feed the hungry of this world when we have
starving people here in the US?
2. Is welfare for those who can, but don't want to , work a great idea?
3. Is federally funding abortion for minors, without parent's consent,
and good idea?
3A) Is allowing Big Brother tell us how to raise our children a good
idea?
4. Is the idea that someone else might have an idea better than your
make you mad?
5. Do you see All white people as possible KKK members?
6. Do you think taking away out Constitutional right to bear arms a
good idea (even though gangs and criminals will get them anyways)?
7. Is you idea of gun control to make it where only law enforcement (an
arm of big brother) can get them?
8. Do you believe taht anyone who owns a gun is automatically a member
of some extreme militia movement?
9. Do you believe the news media paint s an *ACCURATE* view of the news?
10. Do you believe that the Kennedy's are really good for the this
country?
11. Do you see conspiracy in the Government, but only from the
Republican side?
12. Do you believe that FDR's changing this country from a Republic to a
Democracy was good?
13. Do you think Bill Clinton is a good president, regardless of all the
lies he has been caught in, and the sexual harassment charges?
14. Do you think that Hillary would make a great president?
15. Do you *REALLY* believe Clinton didn't "sell" the White House?
16. IS having US troops train in our country a good idea?
17. Is rescueing every country that cries for help a good idea?
17A. Even if after we help they kick us out and tell us to mind our own
busines?
18. Do you think that all diversity groups are looking for is equality
and not pay back?
If you answered yes to any of these, then congratualtions, you are
helping to bring this once great nation to its knees.
The dream is dead!! Thank you FDR!
--
The views expressed herein are not necessarily that of IBMs
but are of my own.
________ ___ ____
/ __ __| / _ \ | _ \
______> \ | | | _ || /_____________________________
/ _______/ |_| |_| |_||_|\______________________________ \
/ / \ \
| | | |
| | Chris Anderson AIX Product Test | |
| | internet : c...@austin.ibm.com IST Test Lab | |
| | VM : CDA at AUSVM6 RISC System/6000 Division | |
| | 512-828-0227 / T/L 678-0227 Austin, Texas | |
| | | |
\ \____________________________ _ ___ ____ _______/ /
\___________________________ | | | / _ \ | _ \ / _______/
| |/\| || _ || /_> \
\_/\_/ |_| |_||_|\_____/
Gav. McNett
Gav. McNett has suffered a head injury, and is now a conservative.
Chris Anderson wrote:
>
> DA MAN wrote:
> >
> > Are You INSANE? Take this test..
> <Drivle snipped>
>
> Are you a Bleeding Heart Liberal? Take this test..
>
> 1. Is it a good idea to feed the hungry of this world when we have
> starving people here in the US?
Feed starving people in the US!? What're you, a COMMIE!?
> 2. Is welfare for those who can, but don't want to , work a great idea?
Just try to take away my Social Security, liberal scum!
> 3. Is federally funding abortion for minors, without parent's consent,
> and good idea?
Depends. Are they immigrants?
> 3A) Is allowing Big Brother tell us how to raise our children a good
> idea?
What party is he?
> 4. Is the idea that someone else might have an idea better than your
> make you mad?
I never have any ideas -- especially that one.
> 5. Do you see All white people as possible KKK members?
Shee! I WISH!
> 6. Do you think taking away out Constitutional right to bear arms a
> good idea (even though gangs and criminals will get them anyways)?
Constitution, schmonstitution. I've got MY guns; fuck you!
> 7. Is you idea of gun control to make it where only law enforcement (an
> arm of big brother) can get them?
And criminals. Don't forget criminals. I'm a card-carrying member of the
NRA, and I support smokers' rights!
> 8. Do you believe taht anyone who owns a gun is automatically a member
> of some extreme militia movement?
Shee! If only!
> 9. Do you believe the news media paint s an *ACCURATE* view of the news?
Yes, when they say things I agree with.
> 10. Do you believe that the Kennedy's are really good for the this
> country?
???
> 11. Do you see conspiracy in the Government, but only from the
> Republican side?
What a boring, one-sided survey. ...I think my head is feeling better
now. (Woob! Woob! Woob!) Hey! Where am I!?
Chris Anderson
I like your responces. Almost like mine would have been, but after
"DaMan" posted that drivle about You are a Repulbican if... crap, I just
couldn't help it....
Mountain Man
george wolsfeld
Are you insane?
Is this a multiple choice question?
Jawj
pardi
When we think of true patriots we must remember "Michael New". I just
can't get any information as to what our fine government has done to this
man. Does anyone have any information.
Proud
Mountain Man
Your Pal...Sal wrote:
>(DA MAN) wanted to know:
> Are You INSANE?
>Meanwhile, MtnMan, taking a break from his finger painting therapy class,
>replied...
> Why yes, I am. Who told you?
>I did Bob... I'm sorry was it supposed to be a secret?
>Booga Booga...
>Sal
And you still want to be in DC at the same time?...........
BUAAA-HA-HA-hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!
>P.S.
> Don't know if I ever told you guys...
>I use to work in the cafateeria in Belveiw Hospital for the insane...
> !!!! I SERVED SOUP TO NUTZ !!!!
Hehehehe...... speaking of nuts... did I ever tell you have one of
mine in a jar??
Hoohoohoohehehehohohoho!!!!!!
Bob
Gabby
Are you insane?
No , I am a very happy well adjusted individual leading a very
productive life. Now watch this....I laugh
now....HAHAHAHAHEHEHE...Wheeze...I laugh more now
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH...HEHEHOHO
your_pal..._sal
MntinMan, makin' me squirm at bit, offered this bit of info...
speaking of nuts... did I ever tell you have one of mine in a jar??
What?!?...
Wuz that BAM so tight you could'nt get the rest of you in there???
See those Wacks never let you play with them...
Sempers,
Sal
Mountain Man
bag...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>It was a dark and stormy night in alt.war.vietnam when pardi
><pa...@ici.net> uttered these fateful words:
>Isn't he rotting in some jail cell where he belongs?
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Frank Vaughan "Spectre Gunner" baguio (at) ix.netcom.com
Why yes Frank. I believe he is. You'd think with all these
newsgroups that those guys have dribbled over into they'd have
included soc.veterans. If I remember correctly they had a never
ending debate about that guy over there for a couple of months
running. Now I rememeber why I quit gowing there :-)
Bob
TIMOTHY GUEGUEN
pardi (pa...@ici.net) wrote:
: When we think of true patriots we must remember "Michael New". I just
: man. Does anyone have any information.
: Proud
Some hero! The guy ruins his military career because he doesn't want to
wear UN insignia, even tho' the US dominates the policies of said
organisation. I can just imagine what attitudes towards him would have
been if he had tried to pull that nonsense in WW2.
tim gueguen ad...@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca
Mountain Man
Your Pal... Sal wrote:
>Sempers,
>Sal
Well, you see, Sal.... I got to thinkin' about all the times in my
life that I said to someone "I'd give my left nut for that" Well...
when they decided to take it I asked if I could keep it so that if I
ever said that again and someone took me up on it, I'd be able deliver
on the deal :-)
Bob
your_pal..._sal
Listing to the right, Mntin Man, Bob Aldrich wrote...
I got to thinkin' about all the times in my life that I said to someone "I'd
give my left nut for that" Well...
when they decided to take it I asked if I could keep it so that if I
ever said that again and someone took me up on it, I'd be able deliver
on the deal :-)
Bob...
Yer a man after my own hearet! I love ya brother... I'd have done the same
thing. Spit in the face of adversity I always say. How's that saying go....
when life hands you a lemon... throw it at someone!?!
If you're really ambitious we could make a movie called "My Left Nut"... can you
play street soccer?
Your Pal,
Sal
Lepore
> 1. Is it a good idea to feed the hungry of this world when we have
> starving people here in the US?
What does a living organism's need for food have to do with
the geographical locations of political boundaries?
> 2. Is welfare for those who can, but don't want to , work a great idea?
No. Those millionaires and billionaires are parasites.
> 3. Is federally funding abortion for minors, without parent's consent,
> and good idea?
All medical care should be free. This isn't the medieval age;
it's the age of automation.
> 3A) Is allowing Big Brother tell us how to raise our children a good
> idea?
You mean the fictitious character in the novel, or do you
mean your brother?
> 4. Is the idea that someone else might have an idea better than your
> make you mad?
Sometimes I get a little irritated at Isaac Newton.
> 5. Do you see All white people as possible KKK members?
No, they deny membership applications based on religious
affiliation and national origin.
> 6. Do you think taking away out Constitutional right to bear arms a
> good idea (even though gangs and criminals will get them anyways)?
No, guns are necessary in case there's a rat in the garage, or
a rattlesnake on the front porch. They probably have some
other uses also, although I can't think of any.
> 7. Is you idea of gun control to make it where only law enforcement (an
> arm of big brother) can get them?
My idea of gun control is to have every gun made with an
attachment that automatically prevents it from firing if
the infra red waves from a human being are detected in
front of it. (We could still shoot rats, because they
are small and so they give off less radiation.)
> 8. Do you believe taht anyone who owns a gun is automatically a member
> of some extreme militia movement?
No, they would have to apply for membership and get through
a screening and interview.
> 9. Do you believe the news media paint s an *ACCURATE* view of the news?
No. For example, during the Vietnam War the media called our
Viet Cong brothers and sisters "the enemy." The news media are
so far to the extreme right it's ridiculous.
> 10. Do you believe that the Kennedy's are really good for the this
> country?
If it wasn't them, it would be someone else. Don't blame
the indivisual capitalist exploiter; blame the institution
of capitalist exploitation itself.
There's no apostrophe in the word "Kennedys." (At least you
didn't write "Kennedies.")
> 11. Do you see conspiracy in the Government, but only from the
> Republican side?
Conspiracy (literally, "to breathe together") exists whenever
two or people make any sort of plan. My wife and I are
conspiring to build the dog a doghouse.
> 12. Do you believe that FDR's changing this country from a Republic to a
> Democracy was good?
It isn't and never was a democracy. Democracy means self-
rule through majority vote. We'll only have democracy
when the workers in every industry and service have the
power to democratically elect their own managers and
supervisors.
> 13. Do you think Bill Clinton is a good president, regardless of all the
> lies he has been caught in, and the sexual harassment charges?
At least he plays the saxophone, which is more than we can
say for all the presidents from hydrogen (Washington)
through niobium (Bush).
> 14. Do you think that Hillary would make a great president?
Did she take music lessons?
> 15. Do you *REALLY* believe Clinton didn't "sell" the White House?
Did you ever hear of a politician who wasn't owned by
silver and gold?
> 16. IS having US troops train in our country a good idea?
Since the U.S. is always the country that invades other
countries, and other countries have troops to defend
themselves against the U.S., what could be "good"
about it?
> 17. Is rescueing every country that cries for help a good idea?
The Buddha said that we should "vow to save all sentient beings."
> 17A. Even if after we help they kick us out and tell us to mind our own
> busines?
The "countries" said that? Which part? The mountains? The
fruited plains?
> 18. Do you think that all diversity groups are looking for is equality
> and not pay back?
My feelings exactly. By the way, what is a diversity group?
> If you answered yes to any of these, then congratualtions, you are
> helping to bring this once great nation to its knees.
Kinky.
> The dream is dead!! Thank you FDR!
You should try melatonin.
> The views expressed herein are not necessarily that of IBMs
> but are of my own.
We know. If it was from IBM, the words "IBM Internal Use
Only" would have been printed in a box of asterisks.
Christopher Morton
On Thu, 25 Sep 1997 16:59:45 -0400, Lepore <lep...@mhvx.net> wrote:
>> 1. Is it a good idea to feed the hungry of this world when we have
>> starving people here in the US?
>
>What does a living organism's need for food have to do with
>the geographical locations of political boundaries?
It has something to do with the available resources of the respective
national entities.
Plan to abolish those boundaries?
Hint: Don't suggest his in Mexico unless you're feeling suicidal.
>> 2. Is welfare for those who can, but don't want to , work a great idea?
>
>No. Those millionaires and billionaires are parasites.
If I sell something for $1 to a million people who want it, whom have
I "parasitized"?
Are you opposed to commerce?
>> 3. Is federally funding abortion for minors, without parent's consent,
>> and good idea?
>
>All medical care should be free. This isn't the medieval age;
>it's the age of automation.
The calendar date is irrelevant to how something is financed. Do you
plan to draft people into being doctors and use force to make them
treat the sick?
>> 3A) Is allowing Big Brother tell us how to raise our children a good
>> idea?
>
>You mean the fictitious character in the novel, or do you
>mean your brother?
How about the fictitious Louis Freeh and his multfarious plans for
all-pervasive surveillance?
>> 4. Is the idea that someone else might have an idea better than your
>> make you mad?
>
>Sometimes I get a little irritated at Isaac Newton.
Many uneducated people do.
>> 6. Do you think taking away out Constitutional right to bear arms a
>> good idea (even though gangs and criminals will get them anyways)?
>
>No, guns are necessary in case there's a rat in the garage, or
>a rattlesnake on the front porch. They probably have some
>other uses also, although I can't think of any.
How about if there's a Klansman on the porch... or a BATF agent... but
I repeat myself.
>> 7. Is you idea of gun control to make it where only law enforcement (an
>> arm of big brother) can get them?
>
>My idea of gun control is to have every gun made with an
>attachment that automatically prevents it from firing if
>the infra red waves from a human being are detected in
>front of it. (We could still shoot rats, because they
>are small and so they give off less radiation.)
So then you would ensure that a woman faced with a rapist armed with a
knife could not defend herself?
Why would you want to do that?
>> 8. Do you believe taht anyone who owns a gun is automatically a member
>> of some extreme militia movement?
>
>No, they would have to apply for membership and get through
>a screening and interview.
In this country, race usually figures into the "screening process".
Do you think that's a GOOD thing?
>> 9. Do you believe the news media paint s an *ACCURATE* view of the news?
>
>No. For example, during the Vietnam War the media called our
>Viet Cong brothers and sisters "the enemy." The news media are
>so far to the extreme right it's ridiculous.
Only if your name is Comrade Gonzalo.
>> 11. Do you see conspiracy in the Government, but only from the
>> Republican side?
>
>Conspiracy (literally, "to breathe together") exists whenever
>two or people make any sort of plan. My wife and I are
>conspiring to build the dog a doghouse.
The Republicans and Democrats are conspiring to make this a
policestate.
>> 12. Do you believe that FDR's changing this country from a Republic to a
>> Democracy was good?
>
>It isn't and never was a democracy. Democracy means self-
>rule through majority vote. We'll only have democracy
>when the workers in every industry and service have the
>power to democratically elect their own managers and
>supervisors.
Do you think that FDR's construction of a chain of racial
concentration camps was good?
>> 13. Do you think Bill Clinton is a good president, regardless of all the
>> lies he has been caught in, and the sexual harassment charges?
>
>At least he plays the saxophone, which is more than we can
>say for all the presidents from hydrogen (Washington)
>through niobium (Bush).
Then I'd rather have David Sanborn for president. I've never caught
him in a lie.
>> 15. Do you *REALLY* believe Clinton didn't "sell" the White House?
>
>Did you ever hear of a politician who wasn't owned by
>silver and gold?
Do you think that's good?
>> 17. Is rescueing every country that cries for help a good idea?
>
>The Buddha said that we should "vow to save all sentient beings."
That's nice. I'm an agnostic. The opinions of religious figures are
irrelevant to me. I certainly won't risk life and limb on account of
them.
>Kinky.
Actually the nihilist view of government as an S&M scene is kinky.
It's what drives the Clintons and Helmses.
---
Gun control, the theory that Black people will be
better off when only Mark Fuhrman has a gun.
Check out:
http://super.zippo.com/~cmorton/home.htm
http://www.firstnethou.com/gunsite/moore.html
Gi...@thelooney.bin
What a load of *CRAP* The United Nations is a foreign Government.
Michael New swore "NO" allegiance to it, and had he, he would be a "Traitor" to
the United States of America, the oath he took to the Constitution, and the
American people he pledged his life to, Michael New IS a hero and a patriot. Any
American who wears the U.N. insignia "IS" a disgrace to the uniform he wears and
a traitor. That includes civilian lap dogs as well as military. BTW since you
make the point that the U.S. dominates the U.N. policies ( which is a pipedream)
just what flag is the U.N. under and who is the controlling Country? Also I
believe it has been illegal to place U.S. soldiers under command of a foreign
commander since before WWII, until recently Clinton has tried, and I believe
this is being disputed in Congress now. If Michael New was asked to do such
idiocy in WWII the Commander would probably be fragged ( Shot ) by his own men.
Gizmo
Death to the United Nations and all who Worship the "Beast"
(alt.politics.usa.republican)
James Madison Jan.19,1788 The Federalist Papers No.41
This picture of the consequences of disunion cannot be too highly
colored, or too often exhibited. Every man who loves peace,
every man who loves his country, every man who loves liberty,
ought to have it ever before his eyes, that he may cherish in
his heart a due attachment to the Union of America, and be able
to set a due value on the means of preserving it.
smarter than a
Someone wrote:
>All medical care should be free. This isn't the medieval age;
>it's the age of automation.
And who would we get to treat people? How would we convince them to
spend all that time learning to become competent doctors if we aren't
going to let them earn a lot of money?
your_pal...sal
Re: Doc's...
Smarter The The Average Bear (err) Liberal, while tappin' his finger in our
cheat, wrote...
How would we convince them to spend all that time learning to become competent
doctors if we aren't going to let them earn a lot of money?
See...
I knew them Corpsmen was gettin more money then us!
Semps,
Sal
P.S.
And besides...how else they gonna pay all them lawyers for all them malpractice
suits?!?
JamJam
>>All medical care should be free. This isn't the medieval age;
>>it's the age of automation.
>
>spend all that time learning to become competent doctors if we aren't
>going to let them earn a lot of money?
At the risk of sounding like a broken record, why are you
assuming that removal of the purely economical side of motivation will
eliminate motivation altogether?
Nextly, medical care is (basically) free here in Australia,
and yet doctors are as highly paid here as anywhere. This is because
the government pays them with money it gets from taxation. The normal
way doctors get paid otherwise is from health insurance money, and
that is less efficient than tax because the health insurance company
takes profit out of the fund before paying for the actual health care,
whereas the government simply pays the money for health care.
*
However, one of the few pieces of psychology that is understood by sanity is how to make young humans with aspirations feel discredited and absurd.
*
Lepore
me:
> All medical care should be free. This isn't the medieval age;
> it's the age of automation.
other person:
> And who would we get to treat people? How would we convince them to
> spend all that time learning to become competent doctors if we aren't
> going to let them earn a lot of money?
If education were free, and if time in school was considered
time working (receive income), then there wouldn't be any
personal sacrifice involved in going to medical school.
Therefore, people would choose to become doctors purely
on the basis of their belief in the goodness of it. Since
the training costs the individual nothing, neither money
nor time, thre would be no reason to give doctors incomes
that exceed the incomes of any other workers.
The solution is to have collective ownership and democratic
management of all the industries and services. With that
foundation, the exact form can be adjusted to make
everything workable.
Robert E. O'Connor
On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 11:01:26 GMT, jam...@magna.com.au (JamJam) wrote:
> Nextly, medical care is (basically) free here in Australia,
>and yet doctors are as highly paid here as anywhere. This is because
>the government pays them with money it gets from taxation. The normal
>way doctors get paid otherwise is from health insurance money, and
>that is less efficient than tax because the health insurance company
>takes profit out of the fund before paying for the actual health care,
>whereas the government simply pays the money for health care.
American not only do not understand this; they WON'T understand it.
People in the U.S. who have health care insurance coverage either pay
between $3000 and $5000 per year, per person for it or their employers
pay that. (They can't seem to see that if their employers were NOT
paying for their health insurance that they could be taking that money
home as pay. But, that's another subject.) They say that they don't
want to pay the higher taxes that a national health system would
require. Of course, they're not calculating that if they were paying
those taxes they would NOT be paying the 3-5 thousand in insurance
premiums and the taxes would be a hell of a lot less than that.
As for the doctors in this country who have resisted national health
for more than 50 years they're now becoming the employees of the
Health Maintenance Organization INDUSTRY. They're making less money
for their services; they're forced to practice their professions as
business owners of the HMOs see fit and they're subject to dismissal
which is a whole new game for doctors. In addition, the patients are
all unhappy and worried by the system. So, we shall see if this
myopia continues. In the meantime, don't expect Americans to make any
sense when discussing health care delivery systems.
Robert E. O'Connor
rob...@dorsai.org
New York, NY
Christopher Morton
On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 10:42:44 -0400, Lepore <lep...@mhvx.net> wrote:
>me:
>> All medical care should be free. This isn't the medieval age;
>> it's the age of automation.
>
>other person:
>> And who would we get to treat people? How would we convince them to
>> spend all that time learning to become competent doctors if we aren't
>> going to let them earn a lot of money?
>
>If education were free, and if time in school was considered
>time working (receive income), then there wouldn't be any
>personal sacrifice involved in going to medical school.
Really? So then there's no more work involved in becoming a doctor
than say, becoming a dishwasher in a restaurant?
>Therefore, people would choose to become doctors purely
>on the basis of their belief in the goodness of it. Since
Really? Then why don't YOU become a doctor "for the goodness of it",
and donate your salary to charity?
>the training costs the individual nothing, neither money
>nor time, thre would be no reason to give doctors incomes
>that exceed the incomes of any other workers.
Going to medical school doesn't cost time? So then how long do you
think it takes to become a doctor?
2-3 weeks?
A month, tops?
>The solution is to have collective ownership and democratic
>management of all the industries and services. With that
>foundation, the exact form can be adjusted to make
>everything workable.
ALL of them? So if I want to open a taco stand, I can't do that, it
has to be "collectively" owned?
What if I don't WANT it to be collectively owned?
F. Prefect
On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 11:01:26 GMT, jam...@magna.com.au (JamJam) wrote:
>>>All medical care should be free. This isn't the medieval age;
>>>it's the age of automation.
>>
>>And who would we get to treat people? How would we convince them to
>>spend all that time learning to become competent doctors if we aren't
>>going to let them earn a lot of money?
>
> At the risk of sounding like a broken record, why are you
>assuming that removal of the purely economical side of motivation will
>eliminate motivation altogether?
>
> Nextly, medical care is (basically) free here in Australia,
>and yet doctors are as highly paid here as anywhere. This is because
>the government pays them with money it gets from taxation. The normal
>way doctors get paid otherwise is from health insurance money, and
>that is less efficient than tax because the health insurance company
>takes profit out of the fund before paying for the actual health care,
>whereas the government simply pays the money for health care.
>*
>However, one of the few pieces of psychology that is understood by sanity is how to make young humans with aspirations feel discredited and absurd.
>*
A very logical approach that for some strange reason most people in
the country fail to grasp. Ah, but the health insurance companies did
spend a tidy sum a couple of years ago when national health care was
debated in this country. They continue to laugh all the way to the
bank.
Ford
Christopher Morton
On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 11:01:26 GMT, jam...@magna.com.au (JamJam) wrote:
>>>All medical care should be free. This isn't the medieval age;
>>>it's the age of automation.
>>
>>And who would we get to treat people? How would we convince them to
>>spend all that time learning to become competent doctors if we aren't
>>going to let them earn a lot of money?
>
> At the risk of sounding like a broken record, why are you
>assuming that removal of the purely economical side of motivation will
>eliminate motivation altogether?
Because most people who put out that sort of money and effort expect
some sort of return.
Christopher Morton
>People in the U.S. who have health care insurance coverage either pay
>between $3000 and $5000 per year, per person for it or their employers
>pay that. (They can't seem to see that if their employers were NOT
>paying for their health insurance that they could be taking that money
>home as pay. But, that's another subject.) They say that they don't
>want to pay the higher taxes that a national health system would
>require. Of course, they're not calculating that if they were paying
>those taxes they would NOT be paying the 3-5 thousand in insurance
>premiums and the taxes would be a hell of a lot less than that.
Screw the expense, the government of this country absolutely cannot be
trusted with that much power.
I'll be damned if the assholes who ran racial concentration camps
during WWII, let Black people die untreated of syphilis and who
injected the ignorant with plutonium without effective consent, are
going to control the health care system in this country.
Andrew Gilbert
This thread has no bearing on the newsgroup alt.war.vietnam. Please remove
AWV from the multi NG broadsides.
As for as politics go, it isn't a bad thread, but AWV is without politics
and wishes to stay neutral
cru...@ix.netcom.co
In <34310F...@mhvx.net> Lepore <lep...@mhvx.net> writes:
>
>me:
>> All medical care should be free. This isn't the medieval age;
>> it's the age of automation.
>
>> spend all that time learning to become competent doctors if we
aren't
>> going to let them earn a lot of money?
>
>time working (receive income), then there wouldn't be any
>personal sacrifice involved in going to medical school.
>on the basis of their belief in the goodness of it. Since
>nor time, thre would be no reason to give doctors incomes
>that exceed the incomes of any other workers.
>
>management of all the industries and services. With that
>foundation, the exact form can be adjusted to make
>everything workable.
>
In other words, the answer is socialism. This is exactly why people
are opposed to socialized medicine: It isn't possible unless all
industries are socialized. And socialism DOESN'T WORK. People will
not enter the medical profession in droves because of the pure goodness
of it. They will not strive to become the BEST doctors unless they are
going to gain personally from it.
To become a great doctor requires tremendous personal sacrifice
regardless of whether one gets paid for going to school. Medical
school and continuing education as a physician are extremely taxing,
and if the reward isn't there, the sacrifice won't be made by most.
Paying for medical school is not the probelm, and getting paid while
they do it is not the problem. Both of these things are taken acre of
under the current system. It is the continuing rewards that motivates
people to make these sacrifice.
This is not to say that doctors don't care about their patients, or
about people's health. It is to say, however, that such sacrifices are
a lot to ask, and they generally won't be made unless there is
sufficient reward.
There is, after all, a reason why the health care standards in the U.S.
are higher than elsewhere in the world.
Kevin Davis
>On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 11:01:26 GMT, jam...@magna.com.au (JamJam) wrote:
>
>
>> Nextly, medical care is (basically) free here in Australia,
>>and yet doctors are as highly paid here as anywhere. This is because
>>the government pays them with money it gets from taxation. The normal
>>way doctors get paid otherwise is from health insurance money, and
>>that is less efficient than tax because the health insurance company
>>takes profit out of the fund before paying for the actual health care,
>>whereas the government simply pays the money for health care.
>
>American not only do not understand this; they WON'T understand it.
>
>People in the U.S. who have health care insurance coverage either pay
>between $3000 and $5000 per year, per person for it or their employers
>pay that. (They can't seem to see that if their employers were NOT
>paying for their health insurance that they could be taking that money
>home as pay. But, that's another subject.)
Oh sure. All employers are going to voluntarily fork over an extra
3-5K a year if a gov't plan is installed. The only chance for that
happening is if the job market is very good for employees.
> They say that they don't
>want to pay the higher taxes that a national health system would
>require. Of course, they're not calculating that if they were paying
>those taxes they would NOT be paying the 3-5 thousand in insurance
>premiums and the taxes would be a hell of a lot less than that.
Maybe but then again there would be a distinct difference between
service and what you pay for it. Why is it again that Canadians are
fleeing into the US to get certain operations or health services? Oh
yeah because they have a gov't run health care and they have to stand
in line to get Aspirgum.
>
>As for the doctors in this country who have resisted national health
>for more than 50 years they're now becoming the employees of the
>Health Maintenance Organization INDUSTRY. They're making less money
>for their services; they're forced to practice their professions as
>business owners of the HMOs see fit and they're subject to dismissal
>which is a whole new game for doctors. In addition, the patients are
>all unhappy and worried by the system. So, we shall see if this
>myopia continues. In the meantime, don't expect Americans to make any
>sense when discussing health care delivery systems.
Don't expect liberals to make any sense when they have a chance to
expand gov't.
Remove zzz from my email address:
~~~Golf Tip: Don't pick up a lost ball until it stops rolling~~~o
Kevin Davis "Hoser" email - kda...@zzzcastlegate.net
Home Page - http://www.castlegate.net/personals/kdavis
Standard Disclaimer (Win95 Tips, sound bites, and more!)
Lepore
> Then why don't YOU become a doctor "for the goodness of it",
> and donate your salary to charity?
Because I chose to become a physics instructor instead. What
in the world are you talking about? I didn't say that the
ideal situation was for everyone to become a doctor. I said
the ideal is for those who do choose to become doctors to
make that choice because they believe in the goodness of
it, instead of becuase they see dollar signs in front of
their eyes.
As for contributing my salary to charity: after I spend
about 99.8 percent of my salary to feed and house my family,
I have to save the other 0.2 percent so I might have
something to eat in my old age, at least for a little while.
That's how great this capitalist wage-slavery is.
Lepore
ME
> the training costs the individual nothing, neither money
> nor time, thre would be no reason to give doctors incomes
> that exceed the incomes of any other workers.
YOU
> Going to medical school doesn't cost time? So then how long do you
> think it takes to become a doctor?
I didn't say it doesn't take time. I said that, if all educaiton
was classified as WORK, the learner not only freed of the need to
pay tuition, but, furthermore, given the same weekly income as
most other workers, then deciding to get an education wouldn't
cost the individual any personal time or involve any other
sacrifice. Then people would choose the careers that best match
their talents and their beliefs about what's best for humanity,
without regard for time or money. We'd have a must better
civilization.
Finally we can have all that, now that we are in the age of
automation and robotics, now that the production problem is
solved, and we only have an artificial distribution problem due to
the division of people into propertied and propertiless classes.
WE can achieve a higher civilization if we are willing to scrap
the cherished institution of class rule.
Mike Lepore in New York lep...@mhv.net
Lepore
> So if I want to open a taco stand, I can't do that, it
> has to be "collectively" owned?
> What if I don't WANT it to be collectively owned?
The kind of socialism I believe in wouldn't have a "rule" against
starting a business. It's just that most people would work in
socially-owned industries, and get paid with consumption credits
that they could redeem for goods at socially-owned stores,
therefore you wouldn't have a circulating currency that people
could spend for your tacos. If people want to trade work
(e.g., I'll paint your house if you'll give me tacos), and perhaps
print their own green pieces of paper to assist with the
bookkeeping for that purpose, and call it money, that would be
alright.
--
Christopher Morton
On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 05:14:06 GMT, rob...@dorsai.org (Robert E.
O'Connor) wrote:
>On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 23:21:49 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 11:01:26 GMT, jam...@magna.com.au (JamJam) wrote:
>>
>>> At the risk of sounding like a broken record, why are you
>>>assuming that removal of the purely economical side of motivation will
>>>eliminate motivation altogether?
>>
>>Because most people who put out that sort of money and effort expect
>>some sort of return.
>
>Sure they do. But, I can assure you, that other motivations are
>necessary to become, and remain, a doctor. Don't you think that some
>want to be of value to their fellow man? Can't you imagine that there
I don't have the slightest doubt that not ENOUGH of them want to be
"of value to their fellow man" to work for McDonalds wages, certainly
not without coercion being involved.
>are also people who are fascinated by the subject of medicine
>regardless of its monetary rewards?
I'm fascinated by the subject of 19th century Japanese military
history. It's a HOBBY. My JOB pays the rent, and feeds and clothes
me, and buys the other things I need and want.
Robert E. O'Connor
On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 23:28:16 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
wrote:
>Screw the expense, the government of this country absolutely cannot be
>trusted with that much power.
So, we're going to take that tired old tack that the government can do
no right. And, the corrollary is, I suppose that private enterprise
can do no wrong. You, therefore, or so it would seem, would rather
put the health of this nation in the hands of the insurance industry
who, as we all know, are in business for the good of the people. Is
that right?
>I'll be damned if the assholes who ran racial concentration camps
>during WWII, let Black people die untreated of syphilis and who
>injected the ignorant with plutonium without effective consent, are
>going to control the health care system in this country.
Now, these things are true and undeniably horrible. You cannot,
however, tar the entire Federal government, every agency within it and
every Federal employee with the same brush, saying that they're all
genocidal maniacs and/or morons; and that's precisely what you're
trying to do.
You apparently have no faith in the medical profession either, and
surely you have no understanding of how it works--though you might
think that doctors are all Mengeles who--without the intervention of
big business--will willingly commit murder for their government.
Robert E. O'Connor
On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 00:48:02 GMT, kda...@zzzcastlegate.net (Kevin
Davis) wrote:
>On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 18:55:55 GMT, rob...@dorsai.org (Robert E.
>O'Connor) wrote:
>Oh sure. All employers are going to voluntarily fork over an extra
>3-5K a year if a gov't plan is installed. The only chance for that
>happening is if the job market is very good for employees.
I don't where you got that, from what I wrote. I'm sure you misread.
Please, take another look.
>>People in the U.S. who have health care insurance coverage either pay
>>between $3000 and $5000 per year, per person for it or their employers
>>pay that. (They can't seem to see that if their employers were NOT
>>paying for their health insurance that they could be taking that money
>>home as pay. But, that's another subject.)
>> They say that they don't
>>want to pay the higher taxes that a national health system would
>>require. Of course, they're not calculating that if they were paying
>>those taxes they would NOT be paying the 3-5 thousand in insurance
>>premiums and the taxes would be a hell of a lot less than that.
>
>Maybe but then again there would be a distinct difference between
>service and what you pay for it. Why is it again that Canadians are
>fleeing into the US to get certain operations or health services? Oh
>yeah because they have a gov't run health care and they have to stand
>in line to get Aspirgum.
That's a lot of horse-shit that's been shoveled by the HMO industry.
This whole accusation against the Canadian system has been bandied
about for a long time now. If you want to believe the Canadians are
unhappy with their system and that they're under-cared for by it then
that's what you'll do, no matter what anyone tells you. The facts
are, however, that the vast majority of Canadians are delighted with
their system. They are not charging our borders to see doctors and to
have operations and they certainly don't have to stand in lines at the
pharmacies.
>Don't expect liberals to make any sense when they have a chance to
>expand gov't.
Why didn't you say that right up-front? I'd have saved time by simply
ignoring you, as one must ignore all ignoramouses.
Christopher Morton
>On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 23:28:16 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
>wrote:
>
>>Screw the expense, the government of this country absolutely cannot be
>>trusted with that much power.
>
>So, we're going to take that tired old tack that the government can do
>no right. And, the corrollary is, I suppose that private enterprise
>can do no wrong. You, therefore, or so it would seem, would rather
>put the health of this nation in the hands of the insurance industry
>who, as we all know, are in business for the good of the people. Is
>that right?
Do you consider racial concentration camps "right"?
It wasn't Humana Corp. or Liberty Mutual who built Manzanar and Hart
Mountain. It was the U.S. government.
Any harm that a private corporation does doesn't have the force of
arms behind it. Allstate can't come knowingly enforce a false lean
against me, knowing they aren't owed the money upfront. It takes
government for that.
>>I'll be damned if the assholes who ran racial concentration camps
>>during WWII, let Black people die untreated of syphilis and who
>>injected the ignorant with plutonium without effective consent, are
>>going to control the health care system in this country.
>
>Now, these things are true and undeniably horrible. You cannot,
>however, tar the entire Federal government, every agency within it and
>every Federal employee with the same brush, saying that they're all
>genocidal maniacs and/or morons; and that's precisely what you're
>trying to do.
Of course I can tar the entire government with that. If the U.S.
government could put people in racial concentration camps without
reference to guilt or innocence of ANY crime, other than being of the
"wrong" race or ethnic group, I can certainly declare the U.S.
government in return a menace to individual liberty. And as we saw
last week, the IRS is doing everything it can to prove I'm right.
You're so eager to bow down before government, that you'd be willing
to gloss over racial concentration camps in order to do it.
I'm an agnostic. If I refuse to worship omnipotent supernatural
beings, I'm certainly not going to worship government made up of
squalid human beings.
>You apparently have no faith in the medical profession either, and
>surely you have no understanding of how it works--though you might
>think that doctors are all Mengeles who--without the intervention of
>big business--will willingly commit murder for their government.
What company did Mengele work for when he was doing involuntary human
experimentation?
But of course your comment is a strawman anyway. When you put the
government in charge of health care, you put them in charge of who
will be treated, and that worked SO "well" in the Tuskegee
experiments, didn't it?
Robert E. O'Connor
On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 23:21:49 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
wrote:
>On Tue, 30 Sep 1997 11:01:26 GMT, jam...@magna.com.au (JamJam) wrote:
>
>> At the risk of sounding like a broken record, why are you
>>assuming that removal of the purely economical side of motivation will
>>eliminate motivation altogether?
>
>Because most people who put out that sort of money and effort expect
>some sort of return.
Sure they do. But, I can assure you, that other motivations are
necessary to become, and remain, a doctor. Don't you think that some
want to be of value to their fellow man? Can't you imagine that there
are also people who are fascinated by the subject of medicine
regardless of its monetary rewards?
>
>
>
>---
>Gun control, the theory that Black people will be
>better off when only Mark Fuhrman has a gun.
>
>Check out:
>
>http://super.zippo.com/~cmorton/home.htm
>http://www.firstnethou.com/gunsite/moore.html
Robert E. O'Connor
On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 08:53:31 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
wrote:
>Of course I can tar the entire government with that. If the U.S.
>government could put people in racial concentration camps without
>reference to guilt or innocence of ANY crime, other than being of the
>"wrong" race or ethnic group, I can certainly declare the U.S.
>government in return a menace to individual liberty. And as we saw
>last week, the IRS is doing everything it can to prove I'm right.
It's quite apparent that there's no use in answering your ravings
point by point. You suffer from a proclivity to use what's known as
para-logical assertion. It holds that because Indians have large
noses all people with large noses are Indians. That kind of arguement
does impress some people--ignorant people.
>You're so eager to bow down before government, that you'd be willing
>to gloss over racial concentration camps in order to do it.
The fact is you really do not know what I am or am not eager to do.
In a similar vein I could advance the thought that you are eager to do
nothing but espouse a thoughtless, Libertarian philosophy that appeals
to some covert paranoid streak in your mind. But, I won't say such a
thing. No, no.
>I'm an agnostic. If I refuse to worship omnipotent supernatural
>beings, I'm certainly not going to worship government made up of
>squalid human beings.
An agnostic, of course. An agnostic is one who's afraid to take a
stand and say "I believe there is NO God." Instead you people spend
lifetimes dickering about "discernable proofs," and feeling that
you'll still get into heaven should there be a God. It's a "just in
case" kind of thing, like the way you constantly deride government
while partaking of its every benificence.
>What company did Mengele work for when he was doing involuntary human
>experimentation?
Childish. Really.
>But of course your comment is a strawman anyway. When you put the
>government in charge of health care, you put them in charge of who
>will be treated, and that worked SO "well" in the Tuskegee
>experiments, didn't it?
Oh, we're back to Tuskegee. And if we were talking about the Depart-
ment of the Interior I suppose you'd have to drag in George Armstrong
Custer and Wounded Knee. Then, we have the State Department and the
"ship of the damned" for international duplicity; Korea and Vietnam
for unbridled Defense Department ambition. It could go on and on and
on. And, in the meantime it doesn't seem that you've taken notice of
the conduct and policies of the tabacco industry; the oil industry;
Wall Street and the restrictive treatment regulations of the health
insurance industry--all of which you have absolutely NO CONTROL over
when they do something deleterious to the nation--which is almost
every day.
Robert E. O'Connor
On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 10:26:11 -0400, Lepore <lep...@mhvx.net> wrote:
>I didn't say it doesn't take time. I said that, if all educaiton
>was classified as WORK, the learner not only freed of the need to
>pay tuition, but, furthermore, given the same weekly income as
>most other workers, then deciding to get an education wouldn't
>cost the individual any personal time or involve any other
>sacrifice. Then people would choose the careers that best match
>their talents and their beliefs about what's best for humanity,
>without regard for time or money. We'd have a must better
>civilization.
The next problem you're going to have with this line of reasoning--
with which I totally agree, incidentally--is that many people will,
sincerely, believe that your ideas would lead EVERYONE to storm the
medical schools so that they, too, can earn a lot of money.
>Finally we can have all that, now that we are in the age of
>automation and robotics, now that the production problem is
>solved, and we only have an artificial distribution problem due to
>the division of people into propertied and propertiless classes.
>WE can achieve a higher civilization if we are willing to scrap
>the cherished institution of class rule.
Your uphill battle here is that people in this society fervently
believe that their welfare is dependent upon someone elses want. If
you don't have more than someone, you haven't got enough of something.
It's quite sick, of course.
>
> Mike Lepore in New York lep...@mhv.net
Robert E. O'Connor
On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 08:58:58 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
wrote:
>>Sure they do. But, I can assure you, that other motivations are
>>necessary to become, and remain, a doctor. Don't you think that some
>>want to be of value to their fellow man? Can't you imagine that there
>
>I don't have the slightest doubt that not ENOUGH of them want to be
>"of value to their fellow man" to work for McDonalds wages, certainly
>not without coercion being involved.
It seems you're more than a little jealous of doctors--or at least of
their incomes.
Why should they be willing to work for McDonald's wages? They spend
many years training for their professions and, it should go without
saying, they are in the most responsible of positions, finally.
They're responsible for human life. They go to bed at night with a
concern for others. They wake in the morning to face tasks involving
life and death, not whether to hold the mustard.
Think, man. Don't just react.
Christopher Morton
On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 10:26:11 -0400, Lepore <lep...@mhvx.net> wrote:
>ME
>> the training costs the individual nothing, neither money
>> nor time, thre would be no reason to give doctors incomes
>> that exceed the incomes of any other workers.
>
>YOU
>> Going to medical school doesn't cost time? So then how long do you
>> think it takes to become a doctor?
>
>I didn't say it doesn't take time. I said that, if all educaiton
>was classified as WORK, the learner not only freed of the need to
You don't understand the meaning of the word WORK. In economic terms,
it's activities which you undertake, DESIRED by another, for which he
exchanges money or goods.
If you go to Tom Metzger University and get a major in White
supremacism and a minor in concentration camp management, for whom are
you WORKING while you do this? Certainly not Jews and Blacks. Why
then should they pay for this from their taxes?
Will the government take over all universities to ensure that only
"approved" classes are taught?
But you said ALL education would be classified as work, DIDN'T you?
Christopher Morton
On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 10:14:03 -0400, Lepore <lep...@mhvx.net> wrote:
>> Then why don't YOU become a doctor "for the goodness of it",
>> and donate your salary to charity?
>
>Because I chose to become a physics instructor instead. What
What's your salary?
Do you donate it to charity?
>in the world are you talking about? I didn't say that the
I'm talking about your cavalier admonitions to others to which you do
not hold yourself.
Big surprise, huh?
>ideal situation was for everyone to become a doctor. I said
>the ideal is for those who do choose to become doctors to
>make that choice because they believe in the goodness of
>it, instead of becuase they see dollar signs in front of
>their eyes.
How do I know you didn't become a physics instructor because you saw
dollar signs in front of your eyes? Why do you take a salary at all?
Shouldn't you be teaching the the fundamental processes of the
universe out of a love of pedagogy instead of a cupiditous craving for
filthy lucre?
>As for contributing my salary to charity: after I spend
>about 99.8 percent of my salary to feed and house my family,
Why is your family more important than somebody else's?
Do you REALLY have the right to make that choice?
Do you have MORE of a right to do so than a neurosurgeon?
>I have to save the other 0.2 percent so I might have
>something to eat in my old age, at least for a little while.
Who says you have to eat in your old age? Who says you have to have
an old age? If you really cared about others, wouldn't you make room
for them instead of becoming a burden on society?
Christopher Morton
On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 10:40:18 -0400, Lepore <lep...@mhvx.net> wrote:
>> So if I want to open a taco stand, I can't do that, it
> > has to be "collectively" owned?
> > What if I don't WANT it to be collectively owned?
>
>The kind of socialism I believe in wouldn't have a "rule" against
>starting a business. It's just that most people would work in
>socially-owned industries, and get paid with consumption credits
>that they could redeem for goods at socially-owned stores,
"Consumption credits", "socially-owned" stores... mmmh.
I think they tried that in the coalfields of West Virginia. The term
"company store" rings a bell... sounds almost like "socially-owned
store", doesn't it?
Come to think of it, they tried it in the Kolyma and on the White Sea
Canal too....
Christopher Morton
>On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 08:58:58 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
>wrote:
>
>>>Sure they do. But, I can assure you, that other motivations are
>>>necessary to become, and remain, a doctor. Don't you think that some
>>>want to be of value to their fellow man? Can't you imagine that there
>>
>>I don't have the slightest doubt that not ENOUGH of them want to be
>>"of value to their fellow man" to work for McDonalds wages, certainly
>>not without coercion being involved.
>
>It seems you're more than a little jealous of doctors--or at least of
>their incomes.
I leave ascetism to Tibetan monks.
What brand of refrigerator carton do YOU live in?
>Why should they be willing to work for McDonald's wages? They spend
>many years training for their professions and, it should go without
>saying, they are in the most responsible of positions, finally.
EXACTLY. Tell me why they'd work for peanuts.
You CAN'T.
>They're responsible for human life. They go to bed at night with a
>concern for others. They wake in the morning to face tasks involving
>life and death, not whether to hold the mustard.
But you think they make too much money.
>Think, man. Don't just react.
Dr. Mengele heal thyself.
Skal Loret
On 30 Sep 1997 23:28:16 Christopher Morton wrote about "Re: ARE YOU INSANE?":
> I'll be damned if the assholes who ran racial concentration camps
> during WWII, let Black people die untreated of syphilis and who
> injected the ignorant with plutonium without effective consent, are
> going to control the health care system in this country.
So, Chris, how can good health care become a right of all American
citizens, instead of a luxury, or a mechanism to create wealth for a few,
while delivering hideous and eroding levels of service?
Whatever the healthcare delivery system, in the US, is supposed to be, what
it is now ain't working. Not by a long shot.
I have lived in, and gotten sick in a lot of countries, in my 45 years. My
experience is that many countries have good, efficient and competant
medical care systems.
Of course, they have considerably fewer plastic surgeons.
Christopher Morton
On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 20:01:11 GMT, rob...@dorsai.org (Robert E.
O'Connor) wrote:
>On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 08:53:31 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
>wrote:
>
>>Of course I can tar the entire government with that. If the U.S.
>>government could put people in racial concentration camps without
>>reference to guilt or innocence of ANY crime, other than being of the
>>"wrong" race or ethnic group, I can certainly declare the U.S.
>>government in return a menace to individual liberty. And as we saw
>>last week, the IRS is doing everything it can to prove I'm right.
>
>It's quite apparent that there's no use in answering your ravings
>point by point. You suffer from a proclivity to use what's known as
>para-logical assertion. It holds that because Indians have large
>noses all people with large noses are Indians. That kind of arguement
>does impress some people--ignorant people.
It's quite apparent that your love of all-powerful government FAR
transcends any trivial concern for the civil and human rights of mere
mortals.
You're willing to gloss over racial concentration camps and
involuntary human experimentation in your quest to serve the holy
state.
But what did the man say, in order to make an omlet, you have to break
a few eggs?
>>You're so eager to bow down before government, that you'd be willing
>>to gloss over racial concentration camps in order to do it.
>
>The fact is you really do not know what I am or am not eager to do.
I know you by your public pronouncements. If they convey an incorrect
meaning, choose different pronouncements. Until then, you're quite
obviously somebody who'll countenance ANY act of government.
>In a similar vein I could advance the thought that you are eager to do
>nothing but espouse a thoughtless, Libertarian philosophy that appeals
>to some covert paranoid streak in your mind. But, I won't say such a
>thing. No, no.
Say it as much as you want. I'm a non-partisan liberal. I favor
government REGULATION of certain kinds to prevent people from engaging
in the more egregious forms of exploitation. Now you can call that
"Libertarian" if you like, but it's obviously a lie, and even the
Libertarians will say so.
>
>>I'm an agnostic. If I refuse to worship omnipotent supernatural
>>beings, I'm certainly not going to worship government made up of
>>squalid human beings.
>
>An agnostic, of course. An agnostic is one who's afraid to take a
>stand and say "I believe there is NO God." Instead you people spend
No, an agnostic is someone who lacks the ARROGANCE of religious
fanatics and athiests, who PRETEND to know that which in all
likelihood is UNKNOWABLE. The only difference between you and Jimmy
Swaggart is that he ADMITS he has a religion.
>lifetimes dickering about "discernable proofs," and feeling that
>you'll still get into heaven should there be a God. It's a "just in
>case" kind of thing, like the way you constantly deride government
>while partaking of its every benificence.
If in order to have student loans, I must have racial concentration
camps, I'll gladly pay my own way, or just not go to school?
What's a B.A. worth? Domestic surveillance?
How about an M.S.? "Internment camps"?
What would you be willing to pay for a PhD? A modest little sign that
says, "Arbeit Macht Frei"?
As the joke says, "We already know what you are, we're just haggling
over the price."
>
>>What company did Mengele work for when he was doing involuntary human
>>experimentation?
>
>Childish. Really.
What company did Mengele work for when he was doing involuntary human
experimentation?
>>But of course your comment is a strawman anyway. When you put the
>>government in charge of health care, you put them in charge of who
>>will be treated, and that worked SO "well" in the Tuskegee
>>experiments, didn't it?
>
>Oh, we're back to Tuskegee. And if we were talking about the Depart-
>ment of the Interior I suppose you'd have to drag in George Armstrong
>Custer and Wounded Knee. Then, we have the State Department and the
Does Tuskegee make you uncomfortable?
Custer was long a rotting corpse when the U.S. Army committed mass
murder at Wounded Knee.
>"ship of the damned" for international duplicity; Korea and Vietnam
Odd how the S.S. St. Louis incident seems not to BOTHER you. But hey,
FDR had his reasons, right? Just like his reasons for racial
concentration camps, right?
>for unbridled Defense Department ambition. It could go on and on and
>on. And, in the meantime it doesn't seem that you've taken notice of
>the conduct and policies of the tabacco industry; the oil industry;
>Wall Street and the restrictive treatment regulations of the health
>insurance industry--all of which you have absolutely NO CONTROL over
>when they do something deleterious to the nation--which is almost
>every day.
Where did the Liggett group run ITS racial concentration camps in the
'40s?
Hobbit
Lepore <lep...@mhvx.net> wrote
> The solution is to have collective ownership and democratic
> management of all the industries and services. With that
> foundation, the exact form can be adjusted to make
> everything workable.
Its been done. It was called communism and you know what, it didn't work.
JamJam
On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 22:11:21 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
wrote:
>How do I know you didn't become a physics instructor because you saw
>dollar signs in front of your eyes? Why do you take a salary at all?
>Shouldn't you be teaching the the fundamental processes of the
>universe out of a love of pedagogy instead of a cupiditous craving for
>filthy lucre?
And let his family live in poverty?
>>As for contributing my salary to charity: after I spend
>>about 99.8 percent of my salary to feed and house my family,
>
>Why is your family more important than somebody else's?
Did he say it was?
>Do you REALLY have the right to make that choice?
Did he make it?
>Do you have MORE of a right to do so than a neurosurgeon?
Did he claim to have?
>>I have to save the other 0.2 percent so I might have
>>something to eat in my old age, at least for a little while.
>
>Who says you have to eat in your old age? Who says you have to have
>an old age? If you really cared about others, wouldn't you make room
>for them instead of becoming a burden on society?
Putting words into someone's mouth and asserting that they are
not perfect or that they are unwilling to make total self sacrifice
proves or disproves absolutely nothing. I'm left wondering why you did
it.
Greg Dean
And fewer CAT scanners, MRIs, etc. Canada has four sites for open
heart surgery, Milwwaukee has seven. I find the government run
health care programs take care of the normal stuff very well (prenatal
care or basic children's diseases) but fail if anything major happens.
Too much cutting corners.
Plus, there are different health care plans depending on who you
are. In Germany there is the basic plan for the common worker, the
plan for government workers and the plan for the political types.
Who gets the better plan? And if reach a certain age and going
down hill fast, just go home to die. Government health care is
great as long as you are young and productive.
I like the Medical Savings Accounts better. Anything that I control
makes me powerful. MSEs have the company give $4500 to the employee.
$1500 insurance for big problems and $3000 to spend on little problems,
however I want. If I want to pay for my lover's health care, fine.
Eye glasses, fine. Dental, ok. Whatever is left over at the end of
the year, is mine to be saved up. That I can use to cover me if I
am laid off or sick. And it is usable during retirement. Let me
run my own life, thank you.
'
JamJam
On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 22:24:00 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
wrote:
>>The kind of socialism I believe in wouldn't have a "rule" against
>>starting a business. It's just that most people would work in
>>socially-owned industries, and get paid with consumption credits
>>that they could redeem for goods at socially-owned stores,
>
>"Consumption credits", "socially-owned" stores... mmmh.
mmmh.
>I think they tried that in the coalfields of West Virginia. The term
>"company store" rings a bell... sounds almost like "socially-owned
>store", doesn't it?
>
>Come to think of it, they tried it in the Kolyma and on the White Sea
>Canal too....
They did? Why did it fail?
JamJam
>>I didn't say it doesn't take time. I said that, if all educaiton
>>was classified as WORK, the learner not only freed of the need to
>
>You don't understand the meaning of the word WORK. In economic terms,
>it's activities which you undertake, DESIRED by another, for which he
>exchanges money or goods.
Since that doesn't correspond with anything he said, perhaps
he meant the dictionary meaning of work, which is expending effort for
a purpose.
>If you go to Tom Metzger University and get a major in White
>supremacism and a minor in concentration camp management, for whom are
>you WORKING while you do this? Certainly not Jews and Blacks. Why
>then should they pay for this from their taxes?
Do you actually know of anyone who would major in such a
subject?
If you do I'd be delighted to meet them as their work might
give way to some incredible insights into the racist or genocidal
mind.
If on the other hand you are seriously proposing that the
instant education becomes a matter of individual free choice, that the
system will collapse under it's own weight because everyone will
choose an outrageously obscure and useless topic, why not just say so
instead of employing ridicule.
>Will the government take over all universities to ensure that only
>"approved" classes are taught?
>
>But you said ALL education would be classified as work, DIDN'T you?
Putting capitalised EMPHASIS every few words doesn't effect
your arguments logic, or lack thereof.
In my opinion you've committed a rather well documented
fallacy whereby you introduce a discussion of complications involved
with the implementation of ideals into a discussion of the validity of
ideals and use these complications as reasons for abandoning the
ideals.
All ideas, be they great or ludicrous, good or bad, have vast
lists of complications involved with their implementation, and indeed
you could argue for years against some of the most successful ideas in
history by bringing up such complications.
Lepore
You raise a good question there. I'm part of a socialist
group that supports workers' self-management through
representation. You asked what would happen if racists
started a racism school: would society fund them to
teach a racist curriculum. First of all, I'm skeptical of
the idea of private schools. Let the racists go to the
public representatives, and propose the idea that society
start a racist school, and let the public representatives
reply "request denied." Secondly, racism is caused
fundamentally by the prior division of the population
into economic classes, so a noncompetitive, nonprofit
society would see the rapid disappearance of racism.
* * *
Christopher Morton wrote:
> You don't understand the meaning of the word WORK. In economic terms,
> it's activities which you undertake, DESIRED by another, for which he
> exchanges money or goods.
>
> If you go to Tom Metzger University and get a major in White
> supremacism and a minor in concentration camp management, for whom are
> you WORKING while you do this? Certainly not Jews and Blacks. Why
> then should they pay for this from their taxes?
>
JamJam
What do you mean by "it didn't work"? Do you mean "no it
didn't run several successful nations for most of this century" or do
you mean "it didn't last forever" or do you mean "they didn't conquer
the world with it" or do you mean "capitalism proved to be more
competitive than it" or what?
Lepore
[about my claim that getting an education should be considered the
performance of work: no tuition, and an income provided.]
your reply:
> with which I totally agree, incidentally--is that many people will,
> sincerely, believe that your ideas would lead EVERYONE to storm the
> medical schools so that they, too, can earn a lot of money.
If too many people go for too much education, to the point
that too few people are operating the machines of industry, then
society can apply academic standards, to give more education
to those few who are willing to study all day and night.
Education doesn't have to be made into an "easy" task,
just one that carries no economic penalties.
(Most of the areas where people find socialist proposals to be
unworkable can be fixed with minor reforms.)
I'm not sure about the "lot of money" part. A completely
nonprofit economy will mean more for everyone. A street
sweeper will live better than today's millionaires.
Ted Gittinger
In article <3433A3...@mhvx.net>, lep...@mhvx.net says...
>I believe in collective ownership by the entire world
>population of each store, distribution out of a central
>inventory of all the worlds goods, and having no such thing
>as any discrete companies.
Sir:
As they say, I may disagree with what you say while defending to the
death your right to say it.
But will you please believe in it somewhere other than on
alt.war.vietnam? We are into Southeast Asian conflicts, the cuisine of
that locale, post-traumatic stress syndrome, veterans' affairs, and
kindred topics.
Besides, your workers' paradise won't work. It won't work because it
has been tried a number of times and been found wanting. It has been
found wanting because it presumes that people tend to be good if
economic inequities are destroyed.
They won't, though. They will tend to be evil, wicked, mean, bad, and
nasty, just as they always have done.
Regards,
ted gittinger
Lepore
> I think they tried that in the coalfields of West Virginia. The term
> "company store" rings a bell... sounds almost like "socially-owned
> store", doesn't it?
A company store is owned by a profit-making business and
patronized by its employees. I'm more radical than that:
HOLLIS6475
I received a post from JamJam and he did not realize the cross post problem.
And shared a quote for us, not realizing the truth about this NG.
>However, one of the few pieces of psychology that is understood >by sanity is
>how to make young humans with aspirations feel discredited and >absurd.
JamJam seem to be a very decent person, deffinitely not anything like any troll
we have ever had.
Hollis
HOLLIS6475
JamJam
Please check your crossposting headers.
You have posted three today to AWV.
AWV is a very sensitive NG. We are kind an sincere to people, and really try
not to offend anyone. Questioning one sanity is very offensive to some
Brothers. Some were cloister Monks, alter Boys, and such. They are trying to
return to a normal life that has violence in it, rape, murder, etc. It is
very hard for us to understand these concepts.....
Please be knind and watch your cross posting,
OK
Frier Hollis
(one from the Holly)
Christopher Morton
A boss is a boss is a boss.
Give people power and they will abuse it.
Give them great power and they will abuse it greatly.
If I don't like working for Ford Motor I can change jobs or careers.
If the government owns everything, and I don't like the government's
labor policies, I can shut up and take it, or I can starve.
IBM can fire me.
The government can HANG me.
Scott Lee
Lepore <lep...@mhvx.net> wrote in article <3433A3...@mhvx.net>...
> > I think they tried that in the coalfields of West Virginia. The term
> > "company store" rings a bell... sounds almost like "socially-owned
> > store", doesn't it?
>
> A company store is owned by a profit-making business and
> patronized by its employees. I'm more radical than that:
> I believe in collective ownership by the entire world
> population of each store, distribution out of a central
> inventory of all the worlds goods, and having no such thing
> as any discrete companies.
Who controls the distribution from the central inventory? Seems to me that
this person(s) would be very powerful in the scenario you describe.
Scott Lee
Christopher Morton
On Thu, 02 Oct 1997 12:06:14 GMT, jam...@magna.com.au (JamJam) wrote:
>>>I didn't say it doesn't take time. I said that, if all educaiton
>>>was classified as WORK, the learner not only freed of the need to
>>
>>You don't understand the meaning of the word WORK. In economic terms,
>>it's activities which you undertake, DESIRED by another, for which he
>>exchanges money or goods.
>
> Since that doesn't correspond with anything he said, perhaps
>he meant the dictionary meaning of work, which is expending effort for
>a purpose.
WHOSE purpose?
If the public is going to pay for your education, they have a right to
ask to what end they do so.
>>If you go to Tom Metzger University and get a major in White
>>supremacism and a minor in concentration camp management, for whom are
>>you WORKING while you do this? Certainly not Jews and Blacks. Why
>>then should they pay for this from their taxes?
>
> Do you actually know of anyone who would major in such a
>subject?
Of course. Usenet is full of them. Do a Dejanews search on "Larry
Jansen", "Mark Craig", and "Doc Tavish".
The National Alliance website is run by people who could probably only
ever get such a "degree". And he's arguing that the public should pay
for them to get it.
> If you do I'd be delighted to meet them as their work might
>give way to some incredible insights into the racist or genocidal
>mind.
You can gain such an insight for free by reading
alt.politics.white.power and the other groups which the pedophiles of
the White supremacist ultra-rightwing infest. I see no reason to
force the tax payers to foot the bill for TEACHING these concepts.
> If on the other hand you are seriously proposing that the
>instant education becomes a matter of individual free choice, that the
>system will collapse under it's own weight because everyone will
>choose an outrageously obscure and useless topic, why not just say so
>instead of employing ridicule.
It already IS a matter of individual free choice. What the individual
in question is doing is demanding that that choice be SUBSIDIZED by
the public at large. I'm asking whether Jews should be forced to PAY
FOR a course of study in how to MURDER them.
>>Will the government take over all universities to ensure that only
>>"approved" classes are taught?
>>
>>But you said ALL education would be classified as work, DIDN'T you?
>
> Putting capitalised EMPHASIS every few words doesn't effect
>your arguments logic, or lack thereof.
Avoiding uncomfortable questions doesn't ENHANCE your credibility.
> In my opinion you've committed a rather well documented
>fallacy whereby you introduce a discussion of complications involved
>with the implementation of ideals into a discussion of the validity of
>ideals and use these complications as reasons for abandoning the
>ideals.
Again, you resolutely fail to address the issues. If ALL education is
funded, then you commit yourself to PAYING FOR the teaching of BAD
things.
If you want go to school to learn how to commit genocide, you have
that right. You DON'T have the right to have me PAY FOR IT.
> All ideas, be they great or ludicrous, good or bad, have vast
>lists of complications involved with their implementation, and indeed
>you could argue for years against some of the most successful ideas in
>history by bringing up such complications.
I'm sure that Roland Friesler and Andrei Vyshinski would agree
completely.
Christopher Morton
On Thu, 02 Oct 1997 11:55:33 GMT, jam...@magna.com.au (JamJam) wrote:
>On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 22:11:21 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
>wrote:
>
>>How do I know you didn't become a physics instructor because you saw
>>dollar signs in front of your eyes? Why do you take a salary at all?
>>Shouldn't you be teaching the the fundamental processes of the
>>universe out of a love of pedagogy instead of a cupiditous craving for
>>filthy lucre?
>
> And let his family live in poverty?
Why not?
Plenty of families live in poverty.
Why should his live well and not others.
He and his family are consuming resources which others less well off
could use.
>>>As for contributing my salary to charity: after I spend
>>>about 99.8 percent of my salary to feed and house my family,
>>
>>Why is your family more important than somebody else's?
>
> Did he say it was?
What else COULD he be saying? He didn't agree to help others at his
expense, did he?
>>Do you REALLY have the right to make that choice?
>
> Did he make it?
Yes, he did, by his own admission.
Otherwise he'd be helping others less well off instead of his own
family.
>>Do you have MORE of a right to do so than a neurosurgeon?
>
> Did he claim to have?
Yes, he did. He's holding himself to a lower standard than that to
which he holds doctors.
If he won't hold himself to the same standard his words have no moral
force at all.
Indeed they do not.
>>>I have to save the other 0.2 percent so I might have
>>>something to eat in my old age, at least for a little while.
>>
>>Who says you have to eat in your old age? Who says you have to have
>>an old age? If you really cared about others, wouldn't you make room
>>for them instead of becoming a burden on society?
>
> Putting words into someone's mouth and asserting that they are
>not perfect or that they are unwilling to make total self sacrifice
>proves or disproves absolutely nothing. I'm left wondering why you did
>it.
I put his OWN words into his mouth. I'm demanding that he hold
himself to the same standard to which he holds others. Apparently he
isn't up to the task. Therefore his admonitions to others ring
hollow.
Christopher Morton
On Thu, 02 Oct 1997 12:07:58 GMT, jam...@magna.com.au (JamJam) wrote:
>On Wed, 01 Oct 1997 22:24:00 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
>wrote:
>
>>>The kind of socialism I believe in wouldn't have a "rule" against
>>>starting a business. It's just that most people would work in
>>>socially-owned industries, and get paid with consumption credits
>>>that they could redeem for goods at socially-owned stores,
>>
>>"Consumption credits", "socially-owned" stores... mmmh.
>
> mmmh.
>
>>I think they tried that in the coalfields of West Virginia. The term
>>"company store" rings a bell... sounds almost like "socially-owned
>>store", doesn't it?
>>
>>Come to think of it, they tried it in the Kolyma and on the White Sea
>>Canal too....
>
> They did? Why did it fail?
Slavery, even slavery cloaked in juridical mumbo jumbo, is always
inherently inefficient.
Christopher Morton
On Thu, 02 Oct 1997 09:18:32 -0400, Lepore <lep...@mhvx.net> wrote:
>[about my claim that getting an education should be considered the
>performance of work: no tuition, and an income provided.]
>
>your reply:
>> The next problem you're going to have with this line of reasoning--
>> with which I totally agree, incidentally--is that many people will,
>> sincerely, believe that your ideas would lead EVERYONE to storm the
>> medical schools so that they, too, can earn a lot of money.
>
>If too many people go for too much education, to the point
>that too few people are operating the machines of industry, then
>society can apply academic standards, to give more education
>to those few who are willing to study all day and night.
How about if everybody gets a doctor of divinity?
abs...@webtv.net
I know your views are important to you on this subject. That is the
point! They are important to you, not us! Are you so intellectually
hampered that you don't even know where you are posting? Try alt.blow
me. Get the hell out of this ng. Just by cross posting as you do shows
how dumb you are. You don't even know where the hell you are. You have
now posted about 3 miles of hammered donkey dick on here and you are not
wanted. If what you posted was on paper at=A0least I would have
something to wipe my ass with.
P.H.
george wolsfeld
Where did these idiots come from?
George
John J. Stevens
Yeh Brother!!!!!1
John J. (while doin his beads)
HOLLIS6475 <holli...@aol.com> wrote in article
<19971002164...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
Charlie Andrews
Rnav...@worldnet.att.ne, pontificated...
Oommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm....
R>Yeh Brother!!!!!1
R>John J. (while doin his beads)
R>
R>HOLLIS6475 <holli...@aol.com> wrote in article
R><19971002164...@ladder01.news.aol.com>...
R>> JamJam
R>> Please check your crossposting headers.
R>>
R>> You have posted three today to AWV.
R>>
R>> AWV is a very sensitive NG. We are kind an sincere to people, and really
R>try
R>> not to offend anyone. Questioning one sanity is very offensive to some
R>> Brothers. Some were cloister Monks, alter Boys, and such. They are
R>trying to
R>> return to a normal life that has violence in it, rape, murder, etc. It
R>is
R>> very hard for us to understand these concepts.....
R>>
R>> Please be knind and watch your cross posting,
R>>
R>> OK
R>>
R>> Frier Hollis
R>> (one from the Holly)
R>>
R>
___
* UniQWK #2504* Luxuriantly hand-crafted of only the finest ASCII.
HOLLIS6475
Yo! dude,
your like cross posting to AWV NG, were like major into surfing, mongo wave and
tubes...shootin' piers.
Like were also into surfer babes big time.
Your post is like way, way far to complicated
Ok , thanks
gotta wax the board, some dudes have just gotta go.
Hollis, the big Kahunna
JamJam
On Thu, 02 Oct 1997 23:06:34 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
wrote:
>>>Come to think of it, they tried it in the Kolyma and on the White Sea
>>>Canal too....
>>
>> They did? Why did it fail?
>
>Slavery, even slavery cloaked in juridical mumbo jumbo, is always
>inherently inefficient.
Really? How does capitalism work at all then?
*
However, one of the few pieces of psychology that is understood by sanity is how to make young humans with aspirations feel discredited and absurd.
*
Lepore
> As they say, I may disagree with what you say while defending to
> the death your right to say it.
You may be interested to know that Voltaire's actual words, in his
famous 1770 letter to le Riche, were: "I detest what you write,
but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue
to write." Your version is the one we usually use today, and
it is even common for history and philosophy books to give
Voltaire credit for the popular version which (I believe)
he never said.
Christopher Morton
On Fri, 03 Oct 1997 09:38:45 GMT, jam...@magna.com.au (JamJam) wrote:
>On Thu, 02 Oct 1997 23:06:34 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
>wrote:
>
>>>>Come to think of it, they tried it in the Kolyma and on the White Sea
>>>>Canal too....
>>>
>>> They did? Why did it fail?
>>
>>Slavery, even slavery cloaked in juridical mumbo jumbo, is always
>>inherently inefficient.
>
>
> Really? How does capitalism work at all then?
I am free to leave my job at any time. The worst that can happen is
that I won't get payed.
Were the "workers" in the Kolyma, on the White Sea Canal and at
Peenemunde free to leave? What happened to those who attempted to
leave without permission?
Lepore
Although many societies have tried GOVERNMENT ownership of
the industries, none have ever tried COLLECTIVE ownership.
It's not collective owenrship unless it's a day-to-day
democratic process of self-management through the use
of genuine workers' councils and delegates.
Lepore
> But will you please believe in it somewhere other than on
> alt.war.vietnam?
I don't know who makes up these crosspost headers, I don't
believe in crossposting myself, and whenever I originate an
article I send it to one newsgroup only. However, I'm not
going to take an extra two or three hours per day to reedit
the headers of all articles I reply to.
Now, if we had a genuine socialist society, with the ten
hour workweek for all, then there would be plenty of
leisure time for editing the headers.
Besides, the subject line is "Are you insane?" What do
you think would be a good example of an ON-topic reply
by me? How about an anecdote about my crazy aunt, whom
I have locked in the attic?
Andrew Gilbert
I understand that you don't wish to spend the time rebuilding the address
headers on all of the messages to which you reply. We aren't asking you to
do that. What we are asking is that on THIS ONE THREAD you remove
alt.war.vietnam. I don't believe that this is asking too much.
In truth this thread has actually become an argument between you and one or
two other posters.
IMHO, you could probably continue your discussions with those few by means
of e-mail rather than be a bother to COUNTLESS others in this NG and
others. That would be the polite thing to do. I realize that you are
enjoying this thread greatly, and I have no doubt that you would never
knowingly be the thorn in another's side.
PLEASE do the right thing and respect the wishes of those on this NG, who
have asked you to be considerate and possibly the wishes of others who have
not asked.
A large number of people live in rural areas and have to pay long distance
charges . Please don't make them pay to download messages that hold no
interest to them..
Again, I am asking you to do the right thing
hanks
HOLLIS6475
Please remove Alt.war.vietnam from the cc: on your mail to address...
Those cc: a sneeky and you can wind up posting to all kinds of NG, and get
people yelling at you.
thanks
Hollis
Jim Wise
It was one of those dark nights, and you didn't know if it was going
to be stormy or not in alt.war.vietnam when Lepore
<lep...@mhvx.net> keyed the handset and said:
>> But will you please believe in it somewhere other than on
>> alt.war.vietnam?
>
>I don't know who makes up these crosspost headers, I don't
>believe in crossposting myself, and whenever I originate an
>article I send it to one newsgroup only. However, I'm not
>going to take an extra two or three hours per day to reedit
>the headers of all articles I reply to.
Horse Manure!! A lazy person's excuse. Click an insertion point and
backspace out alt.war.vietnam. Two or three hours? Not hardly.
You are a true socialist.
>
>Now, if we had a genuine socialist society, with the ten
>hour workweek for all, then there would be plenty of
>leisure time for editing the headers.
Or more time to complain about how long it takes to do it.
>
>Besides, the subject line is "Are you insane?"
No shit sherlock!. We're glad your can read. Now, try working on
"relevance to topic"
> What do
>you think would be a good example of an ON-topic reply
>by me? How about an anecdote about my crazy aunt, whom
>I have locked in the attic?
Why you go and join her? She could probably give you a few hints
about editing headers.
Jim Wise
USMC, 1sr FSR, Danang, 69/70
SEMPER FI
CWL #69
SFTPOTCP 4th degree
(To reply by email remove "*" from address)
JamJam
On Fri, 03 Oct 1997 23:38:41 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
wrote:
>> Really? How does capitalism work at all then?
>
>I am free to leave my job at any time. The worst that can happen is
>that I won't get payed.
And will therefore starve to death or die of a treatable
disease or medical condition. Great choice.
>Were the "workers" in the Kolyma, on the White Sea Canal and at
>Peenemunde free to leave? What happened to those who attempted to
>leave without permission?
Why don't you stop asking rhetorical questions and just tell
me?
I've never heard of Kolyma, the white sea canal or
preenemunde.
Robert N. Newshutz
Lepore <lep...@mhvx.net> wrote in article <3434EC...@mhvx.net>...
You need to read Hayek's "Road to Serfdom". Besides collective
ownership and the necessary central planning to go along with it
being less efficient than personal choice and a free market, it is
inherently a system that is oppresive of individual liberty.
Christopher Morton
On Sun, 05 Oct 1997 12:28:51 GMT, jam...@magna.com.au (JamJam) wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Oct 1997 23:38:41 GMT, cm...@opman.com (Christopher Morton)
>wrote:
>
>>> Really? How does capitalism work at all then?
>>
>>I am free to leave my job at any time. The worst that can happen is
>>that I won't get payed.
>
> And will therefore starve to death or die of a treatable
>disease or medical condition. Great choice.
No, there are other employers or I can be self-employed.
When the government is the ONLY employer, you will INDEED starve to
death when the government no longer needs or desires your services.
>>Were the "workers" in the Kolyma, on the White Sea Canal and at
>>Peenemunde free to leave? What happened to those who attempted to
>>leave without permission?
>
> Why don't you stop asking rhetorical questions and just tell
>me?
If you don't know the answer, you're profoundly unqualified to debate
this issue.
> I've never heard of Kolyma, the white sea canal or
>preenemunde.
Then you are achieving as much in this debate as an advocate of a flat
earth would in a discussion of orbital strategies for weather
satellites.
You have rendered yourself irrelevant.
Christopher Morton
On Sat, 04 Oct 1997 22:56:39 GMT, bill...@clark.net (Bill Barham)
wrote:
>
>Why don't you all take this bullshit where someone wants to hear it?
I take it then that you're a big FAN of slave labor, genocide and
oppression.
HOLLIS6475
>I take it then that you're a big FAN of slave labor, genocide and
>oppression.
Chris,
It looks like you just don't get it. The reply was not to the subject, but
that you are cross-posting on another newsgroup. Check you CC: to header. I
am on AOL and I know that is hard to do. When you reply to a psot on a NG or
to some one E-mail if they have other address' in hte CC: to part, your post
will be post to that newsgroup.
Newsgroup are specific topic areas, your post is not in this NG topic area.
This does not we like or dislike the topic. BUt we don't and other NGs feel
the same to be a part of the One Big NG.
as far as your reply, I don't think any one here is a big FAN of slave labor,
genocide and oppression.
Hollis
Ron
Damn, it HAS been awhile since I dropped by the group.
By a casual look, old Hollis only misspelled "psot" in that whole spiel.
What happened? Did they finally decide to give out human spell-checkers
to old , worn out Jarheads?
I know it can't be sobriety catching up with you.<G>
Ron
1/101 Abn
67-68
HOLLIS6475
Ron,
for a doggie you sure hide out a lot, I sure can use some help......
This technology shit is for the clerical people....It is a hell of a lot more
for fun just to shot somethin'
I guess modern times calls for modern measures.....
I am off to clerical school..
Take car, and watch were your steppin'
Hollis
Ron
HOLLIS6475 wrote:
>
> Ron,
> for a doggie you sure hide out a lot, I sure can use some help......
According to you members of the Green Team, that's all we ever did
anyway.
> This technology shit is for the clerical people....It is a hell of a lot more
> for fun just to shot somethin'
You've definitely got that shit right.
>
> I guess modern times calls for modern measures.....
>
> I am off to clerical school..
>
> Take car, and watch were your steppin'
>
> Hollis
Where the hell is this "Clerical School" I think I wanna go too.
If you're willing to go, there's got to be something going on there that
I'll like.
Let me know.
Ron
1/101
HOLLIS6475
>Where the hell is this "Clerical School" I think I wanna go too.
>
>
>
>If you're willing to go, there's got to be something going on there that
>I'll like.
>
>Let me know.
>
>Ron
NOw, Now, I ain't sayin, But I am happily married but 27 yrs agao I was not
married........So what the secret.....
BABES!!!!!!
That's all I'm sayin'
Student Hollis
Ron
27 years ago, I might have been, but I don't remember.
I try not to remember now, and I'm doing pretty damn good at it.
So, let's go.
Wannabe Student,
Ron