Kill File in Google Reader? and Message to Beancounter
Family-Outdoors
Because I am too dumb to figure out why no mail reader can download
messages on my computer, I cannot use any of the traditional kill file
methods. I am truly tired of seeing some of the crap on here but
acknowledge their right to post it. On Google Reader if beancounter
calls Obama a C_ _ t in the subject header and I open it with my kids
around it's not cool.
Paul
David LaCourse
All of beancounter's posts come through to me under the thread "major
malfunction." He has used language that I would not want my young
grandchildren to read, but it is not there unless I open "major
malfunction".
However, different readers may allow his profanity to be in the open.
If the profanity appears when you open the post, quite simply, don't
open any of his posts.
A second idea: Ask beancounter to clean up his act so that children
can not read his profanity.
How about it, beancounter? You have a right to post, but if you're
using obscene language in the header, could you please stop it for the
sake of others' feelings?
Dave
~^ beancounter ~^
body...instead of the headers......
" How about it, beancounter? You have a right to post, but if you're
using obscene language in the header, could you please stop it for
the
sake of others' feelings? "
On Dec 29, 7:54 am, David LaCourse <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote:
David LaCourse
> i can keep the "grown up stuff " down in the
> body...instead of the headers......
Good. Problem solved.
Dave
DaveS
>
> - Show quoted text -
Agreed
Dave Snedeker
Tom Littleton
"~^ beancounter ~^" <richb...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:bd2a4df9-fbb1-4749...@j14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>i can keep the "grown up stuff " down in the
>body...instead of the headers......
If you posted anything remotely resembling 'grown-up',
I, for one, would be shocked.
Tom
Giles
Hm.....
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that I'm not about to
express the majority view, but I think you should do whatever you do
when you open up a kiddie porn site or a snuff film or a securities
portfolio or a history book or a novel.....with your kids around.
giles
Jon
>
> I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that I'm not about to
> express the majority view,
I hope not, but I suspect what I say is not the majority view either.
There was a time not long ago when there were things not said in the
presence of ladies or children, both which are certainly on the
Internet. I'd argue that these things shouldn't be said at all, but at
least those who desired to do so had the cultural restraint to keep it
in whatever man-circles they hung around in. Now we bow down to the
idol of free speech and think there should be no restraint whatsoever,
and we are a lesser people because of it.
That's my personal, probably very minority, view anyways. My own rule
is to not write on ROFF anything I wouldn't want my (wife, children,
mother, boss, pastor, etc.) to read.
Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night.
Jon.
Giles
> On Dec 29, 7:26 pm, Giles <g_goat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that I'm not about to
> > express the majority view,
>
> I hope not, but I suspect what I say is not the majority view either.
If you are referring to what you say in general, it varies. Sometimes
it corresponds pretty well with what I perceive as the majority view,
sometimes not.
> There was a time not long ago when there were things not said in the
> presence of ladies or children,
I suspect that is the majority view. And as such, it is just one of
many inexplicably popular myths. Even ladies (as opposed to mere
women) and children have always known those things supposedly not said
in their presence, and they did not acquire such knowledge through
divination or osmosis.
> both which are certainly on the
> Internet.
Well, that isn't a view at all. That's simply a statement of fact.
> I'd argue that these things shouldn't be said at all,
See now, here's a problem. How are we to know what things these are
if you won't say them?
> but at
> least those who desired to do so had the cultural restraint to keep it
> in whatever man-circles they hung around in.
There are those among us today who think that the cultural restraints
which resulted from hanging around in man-circles are not an unmixed
blessing. But then, I guess that's what you get when you have too
many people who spend too little time hanging around in man-circles.
> Now we bow down to the idol of free speech
What you mean "we" white man?
> and think there should be no restraint whatsoever,
I can't account for your experience, but I don't recall that I've ever
heard anyone say that there should be no restraint whatsoever. Of
course, this doesn't necessarily mean that people don't "think" that.
However, I believe that careful inquiry would almost always reveal
that the person being qustioned would admit to at least some
legitimate strictures on free speech.....the old "FIRE!" in a theater
sort of thing.
> and we are a lesser people because of it.
We may be a lesser people (than.....?) or we may not. Pretty hard to
judge on the basis of what's been revealed here thus far.
> That's my personal, probably very minority, view anyways.
As stated, those would appear to be very popular views. But does
anyone here really need to be reminded they they live in a world
filled with popular views that are just plain wrong, or that, in fact,
a possible majority of highly popular views are just plain wrong? As
an obvious example, if a billion or so Christians are right, then
several billion Muslims, Hindus, Jains,
Buddhists, Jews and many others are wrong. Ditto for any other
permutation concerning the above mentioned groups. Et cetera.
> My own rule
> is to not write on ROFF anything I wouldn't want my (wife, children,
> mother, boss, pastor, etc.) to read.
A good enough rule, on the face of it, I guess.....if it works for
you. On the other hand, have you ever given any thought to the
advisability of exposing you wife, children, mother, boss, pastor,
etc., to the things that you DO write......on ROFF or elsewhere?
> Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night.
Christmas? Some of us do not take kindly to forced exposure to pagan
beliefs.
giles
Family-Outdoors
I clearly stated that I was not after trying to shut beancounter up or
filter his speech for everyone. I was looking for a methodology
whereby I could enjoy and read posts without having the words Obama is
a C----sucker blaring on the screen for my wife and kids to see...
I don't know what you are talking about with regard to the crap you
are referencing...are you comparing the content of roff to kiddie porn
and snuff films? Or, are you saying that as I would if somehow I
accidentally navigated to one of those sites, I would immediately
close it? Or are you saying I should simply not open roff in the
presence of wife and kids?
Regardless, I believe I have found the solution thanks to one of the
suggestions previously offered...almost configured and then I can open
roff on the computer in our living room without a chill running down
my spine.
Paul
Family-Outdoors
But of course giles, you would not deprive him of his right to wish
you a Merry Christmas...would you? [or was that part of a point you
were making? A bit groggy this morning]
I do in fact essentially agree that the mythological referenced Norman
Rockwell past, where women and children existed in a realm of
protection by their patriarchs, is just that. However, there is a
middle ground between erroneously believing things were so much better
then...and not making any efforts to monitor what your children do
experience (via internet or other). Essentially, I believe I fall
into the category of a libertarian as all I want is to be able to have
as much control over what my computer does as I can without affecting
the legal activities of giles, beancounter, or anyone else.
Paul
Giles
Not at all.
> [or was that part of a point you
> were making? A bit groggy this morning]
I wasn't so much making a point as giving voice to some thoughts as
they occurred to me in reading Jon's offering.
> I do in fact essentially agree that the mythological referenced Norman
> Rockwell past, where women and children existed in a realm of
> protection by their patriarchs, is just that.
Well, it's not entirely mythological. Paternalism was, and remains,
all too real. And it isn't necessarily always a bad thing.....or a
good thing. Even a cursory analysis, if conducted honestly and with a
modicum of intelligence (yeah, two very scarce commodities.....but it
really doesn't require all that much of either) reveals a great deal
of complexity. Merely acknowledging that complexity would be a great
leap forward for many people.....perhaps most people.....but why
bother with that when one already has all the answers one needs and
the pretense of consideration is so easy to maintain?
> However, there is a
> middle ground between erroneously believing things were so much better
> then...and not making any efforts to monitor what your children do
> experience (via internet or other).
I've never been in a position of having to monitor what anyone else
experiences, it looks to me like you're probably doing a pretty good
job of it, and their isn't much that you or I can do about the rest of
the world. So the problem appears to be purely an academic one, at
least within the current context, for you and me. But appearances, as
they say, are deceiving.
> Essentially, I believe I fall
> into the category of a libertarian as all I want is to be able to have
> as much control over what my computer does as I can without affecting
> the legal activities of giles, beancounter, or anyone else.
I've always been wary of applying labels concerning political or
philosophical leanings to myself or others, largely because there is
virtually no reliable agreement to be expected from any two or more
people on what those labels mean. Am I, for example, a liberal or a
libertarian or a libertine?.....a conservative or a reactionary?.....a
fascist or an anarchist?.....a strict constructionist or a
relativist?.....a lumper or a splitter?.....a hard nose realist or a
spiritualist? All of those terms (and many more) have been applied to
me at one time or another.....and none of them entirely without
justification with regard to certain specific beliefs or actions.
I much prefer terms like idiot, imbecile, moron, dumbass, cretin,
etc. At least there is a fairly widespread consensus on approximately
what they mean, and often even a good deal of agreement on who they
should be applied to. And after all, consensus and agreement are good
things, ainna? :)
Meanwhile, from what I've read in this thread, it appears that there
is no good way to filter the contents of these pages via Google
Groups. However, that shouldn't be much of a problem as you have
already stated the solution above.
giles.
Giles
> On Dec 29, 8:26 pm, Giles <g_goat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 29, 8:13 am, Family-Outdoors <pamann...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Is there a way...any way...to restrict content in Google Reader?
> > > Because I am too dumb to figure out why no mail reader can download
> > > messages on my computer, I cannot use any of the traditional kill file
> > > methods. I am truly tired of seeing some of the crap on here but
> > > acknowledge their right to post it. On Google Reader if beancounter
> > > calls Obama a C_ _ t in the subject header and I open it with my kids
> > > around it's not cool.
>
> > > Paul
>
> > Hm.....
>
> > I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that I'm not about to
> > express the majority view, but I think you should do whatever you do
> > when you open up a kiddie porn site or a snuff film or a securities
> > portfolio or a history book or a novel.....with your kids around.
>
> > giles
>
> I clearly stated that I was not after trying to shut beancounter up or
> filter his speech for everyone.
Well, that's a pity. SOMEBODY should shut him up.
> I was looking for a methodology
> whereby I could enjoy and read posts without having the words Obama is
> a C----sucker blaring on the screen for my wife and kids to see...
Yeah, I think I got that part. O.k., I can't give you a difinitive
answer that will entirely solve your problem forever.....but you could
start by not writing "C-----sucker" in places where the wife and kids
are likely to see it. I can guarantee that isn't going to fool them.
> I don't know what you are talking about with regard to the crap you
> are referencing...
And you think I do? Well, let's find out.
> are you comparing the content of roff to kiddie porn
> and snuff films?
There are certain valid points of comparison. For instance, all three
contain material that you don't want your wife and kids to be exposed
to.....right?
> Or, are you saying that as I would if somehow I
> accidentally navigated to one of those sites, I would immediately
> close it?
I don't know what you would do. I'm saying that given what you've
stated here, that's what you SHOULD do. In like circumstances, it's
what I would do.
> Or are you saying I should simply not open roff in the
> presence of wife and kids?
Hm......
Well, that WOULD solve the problem, wouldn't it?
> Regardless, I believe I have found the solution thanks to one of the
> suggestions previously offered...almost configured and then I can open
> roff on the computer in our living room without a chill running down
> my spine.
Screen off a corner of the living room and you can also open Hustler.
giles
who sometimes thinks that failing to get drafted into having a wife
and children is not an entirely unmixed curse. i mean, after all,
being able to open huckleberry finn in any room in the house at any
time, without getting the cold sweats, has got to be worth
something.....right?
Family-Outdoors
All points very well taken. I need not say more, except thanks.
Paul
Giles
> All points very well taken. I need not say more, except thanks.
> Paul
You're welcome.
giles
~^ beancounter ~^
dosen't know squat about "grown up" topics...sheeze...
On Dec 29, 2:48 pm, "Tom Littleton" <ThomasLittle...@msn.com> wrote:
> "~^ beancounter ~^" <richboni...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:bd2a4df9-fbb1-4749...@j14g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Giles
> well that's cause your are a dumb ass lib/dem Tom...who...
> dosen't know squat about "grown up" topics...sheeze...
Imbecile.
g.
Mark Bowen
~^ beancounter ~^
On Dec 31, 3:01 am, "Mark Bowen" <beaus...@charter.net> wrote:
> On Dec 30, 8:09 pm, "~^ beancounter ~^" <richboni...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > well that's cause your are a dumb ass lib/dem Tom...who...
> > dosen't know squat about "grown up" topics...sheeze...- Hide quoted text -
DaveS
Giles
> drivle from leftie hate mongers.....funny......
Moron.
g.
Mark Bowen
DaveS
> Velvetta Wingnut
Double Velvetta Wingnut, with bougers.
David LaCourse
Ahhhhh, your mama wears combat boots!
And your daddy plays badminton.
d;o)
And Navy is beatin' Mizzou, 28 to 13 with 17 min to go in the Texas Bowl.
Dave (who has often wondered what the hell Velvetta is made of......._
Giles
Aphlabeet soup.
g.
no charge for this one.
~^ beancounter ~^
game this afternoon....
> no charge for this one.- Hide quoted text -
Giles
wrote:
> i would expect nothing less from the loony lefties...btw: good navy
> game this afternoon....
Imbecile.
g.
DaveS
wrote:
It's a fact: you're a Tory fisherperson. Tories fish cheeseballs. You
fish cheeseballs.
Don't fight it. Be comfortable with your inner Tory.
~^ beancounter ~^
DaveS
>
> - Show quoted text -
. . . flies.
Don't struggle with it too much; I might adjust the reading level down
if maybe you could share your recipe for your go-to Velvetta
Cheeseball fly.?
Easily led, simple answer seekers like you, believers in witchcraft
like Palin, and arm chair warriors like Cheney are unfortunate but
disposable political fellow travelers for real conservatives. These
folks will have their papa's money, high heels, book contracts and
born-again scams to keep them in German wheels. But what about your
kind?
The food banks and church handout programs are full of confused,
whimpering former big pie hole wingnuts like you right now, begging
for help from program's and people they trashed just months ago,
before their safe little wingnut worlds crumbled leaving their
arrogance naked of security. Better hope your world holds and you
don't have to choose between eating your popgun or tearing-up in the
welfare line.
Nothing makes a sloganeering wingnut into a practical and humane
progressive faster than living through some bad times. Good luck
Beanster.
Dave
~^ beancounter ~^
Giles
> yawn.........did you say something DaveS?
Yes, he said, "Idiot."
Moron.
g.
Giles
> Loony drivel.......nothin' new here..........
Imbecile.
g.
MajorOz
I don't ordinarily pay attention to playground arguments, but that
last paragraph interested me.
Is it your contention that a disproportionate number of those whom you
call "conservatives" are now seeking aid from programs that they
previously opposed?
...or, did I read it wrong?
cheers
oz
Giles
> I don't ordinarily pay attention to playground arguments, but that
> last paragraph interested me.
Well, we all unaccountably stumble upon things occasionally.
> Is it your contention that a disproportionate number of those whom you
> call "conservatives" are now seeking aid from programs that they
> previously opposed?
>
> ...or, did I read it wrong?
I won't try to answer for Dave (god knows I'd probably have a
difficult time making much more sense of what he says than he can) but
it's hardly a secret that folks everywhere have always generally
approved of programs from which they benefit and not so much of those
from which they do not. Thus, clearly, approval ratings tend to
fluctuate somewhat depending on who benefits when and who don't.
Do you know a lot of people who formerly and vigorously opposed one
program or another from which they did not qualify to benefit, and who
now hold fast to that disapproval when they do qualify?
giles
whose mother never raised such a foolish child.
DaveS
>
> - Show quoted text -
Fair question. Disproportionate? No, I have no basis for saying that
in this specific downturn, people who hold conservative political
views, are more likely to be seeking assistance from agencies/churches
than people who do not have such views. Don't think what I did say
implied that.
It would be pretty hard to tease out answers to that question even if
I were still active professionally. For one, educational levels are
associated with political outlook, as is geography, gender, ethnicity
etc. ie just too many complex variables for a straight up analysis,
and I never felt good about ANOVA or factor analysis anyway. My
opinions are based on personal and shared experiences, no more.
But I will venture this; This recession has dug deeper into some of
the small independent business sectors (than past downturns, when we
had a larger manufacturing base) specifically residential
construction, FIRE (finance, insurance and reat estate), and some of
the tech service areas. These are the "newcomers" in the unemployment
offices and foodbanks. And generally, they break toward the Republican
side, even in the NW. In the foodbanks its some of the above, but more
noticeably, elderly and single parent suburban females that are more
in evidence, as well as male construction and home service
businessmen.
Ive talked to lots of ES and UI staff and customers over decades and
in many states, Red and Blue. The worse the economy, the better was my
consulting business. From personal experience in past recessions and
some mass layoffs I worked professionally, I know that the newly and
rarely unemployed tend to be more conservative. How do I know this?
Because people tell you all kinds of stuff when they are up against
the wall, whether you want to know or not. Most often they want you to
know that they are "not that kind" or this is their first time blah
blah blah. And they do say things like "6 months ago I thought this
program was for bums" etc.
And sometimes they think weird stuff and bring it with them: for
example I remember one guy who wanted the employment counselor helping
him fired because a man in the poster on the wall had arm muscles and
therefore was Marxist in his eyes, seriously. I recall another example
when I found several laid off "patriots" had intimidated a young
counselor into approving expensive helicopter retraining. There are
also folks who want to scream out their beliefs and a few want to hurt
someone as a part of their employment service experience.. And there
are a very few people who bring guns with them. Bottonline, there is
lots of emotion concentrated in one place when the labor market goes
cacahuate, and people want to "tell their story."
Foodbanks are somewhat different. The best try to mimic a grocery
store, with carts, choices and pleasant space. However, humiliation
for people who are not used to being dependent is never far away.
People know why they are there. I traveled lots for work but Ive lived
in the same 22k affluent community for 38 years. I know something of
peoples politics and I know who I see at the food bank. This recession
is not skipping conservatives.
All of this is not saying that people with rightwing views get their
"comeuppance" when they come for help. Ive never seen public or non-
profit program staff use this vulnerability as a supposed "teaching
moment" for making conservatives somehow more compassionate and
liberal. Rightwing politics in these service environments is just
baggage and slows up service for other people. But there are
occasions, as program staff will tell you, that they have to take
ideological shit and abuse at the same time they are helping the same
people get thru their bad times. Its just the way it is.
However I personally believe that most adults learn understanding and
compassion from life's experiences, and I believe that these
experiences moderate rigid political beliefs. I also believe that all
public human services facilities should have "safe rooms" for when the
inevitable whackjob (wingnut or otherwise) wants to hasten
Gotterdammerung. But that's a whole nuther rant.
Dave
As to your "playground" insult . . . duely noted culero.
DaveS
Yep, I think you've got it.
The stain of pain plays mainly on the brain.
Dave
David LaCourse
>>
>> The food banks and church handout programs are full of confused,
>> whimpering former big pie hole wingnuts like you right now, begging
>> for help from program's and people they trashed just months ago,
>> before their safe little wingnut worlds crumbled leaving their
>> arrogance naked of security.
>
> I don't ordinarily pay attention to playground arguments, but that
> last paragraph interested me.
>
> Is it your contention that a disproportionate number of those whom you
> call "conservatives" are now seeking aid from programs that they
> previously opposed?
>
> ...or, did I read it wrong?
No, that is what he is saying. However, from my experience, he is
wrong (at least here in the left wingnut state of Massachusetts). I
work in a food pantry and I've yet to meet someone like Dave has
described. Most of our clients have been coming to the pantry for
years. There has been new ones in the past year, but they are the
working poor, and from talking with them, I doubt any are Republicans
let alone conservatives.
Most of the volunteers did not vote for Obama. All of the clients
probably did vote for Obama.
Dave
>
DaveS
> No, that is what he is saying. However, from my experience, he is
> wrong (at least here in the left wingnut state of Massachusetts). I
> work in a food pantry and I've yet to meet someone like Dave has
> described. Most of our clients have been coming to the pantry for
> years. There has been new ones in the past year, but they are the
> working poor, and from talking with them, I doubt any are Republicans
> let alone conservatives.
> Most of the volunteers did not vote for Obama. All of the clients
> probably did vote for Obama.
> Dave
> - Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -
Well OK
1. No I am not saying that a disproportionate number of conservatives
are going to food banks. How could I know that? Maybe we have
different definitions of proportionate? For me, it would mean that a
higher proportion (%) of the total universe of conservatives are
coming to food banks, THAN the proportion (%) of the universe of
others who come to food banks.
2. What I am saying is that based on my experiences in the past, and
some current observations and info, I believe that a larger number of
people with conservative political beliefs are coming to food banks
(and other human services) than do in non recessionary times.
And . . .
3. Again from experience, not survey or experiment, these folk are
typically new comers to needing assistance and are often very
emotional, sometimes hostile and demanding, and rarely but regularly
threatening. Its hard times and they are not used to asking for help.
4. Hello, I was responding to Beanster's characterization that libs
typically walk by a beaten man and are more concerned with criminals
than victims. Rightwingers love those kind of jokes which imply that
wingnuts are stand-up heroes, without actually helping anybody.
Bonhoeffer called stuff like this "cheap grace." I think.
Side note: By the way, Working poor people are not somehow immune to
voting R or immune to conservative political belief, particularly
around issues like abortion, unionization, etc.. Karl Rove sure knew
that in the 2004 Ohio election, and wasn't there this Reagan fellow
who . . . .
Since to your knowledge no conservative has come into the food pantry
where you volunteer, to ask for assistance or acted emotionally, you
apparently have touched the elephant in a different place. ;+))
Dave
By the way the most hostile and demanding laid off people in my
experience base were defense workers, engineers and middle managers.
The most appreciative, positive and eager to retrain (?) . . . people
like laid off sawmill workers in Snoqualemie and paper workers out on
the Coast. And all these groups got (get?)enhanced services, and
deeper support. You figure.
MajorOz
Thank you.
I now more fully understand what you seem to have previously meant.
And, I appreciate your experiences and observations in the area.
Although marginally greater than mine, conclusions and interpretations
(and neither of us have predispositions, do we, now :>) ) are somewhat
different.
cheers
oz, who noted a distinctly different tone, not at all in the
playground style (perhaps it rubs off from those who shall remain
unmentioned) of some previous posts.
David LaCourse
Could be true, I guess. But, in my experience looking over the past
year most of the new clients at the food bank I volunteer at are the
working poor, blue collar workers, not your typical conservative. This
is also true at three or four other food banks/pantries in the area
that I am familiar with, including one in a well-to-do community.
> And . . .
> 3. Again from experience, not survey or experiment, these folk are
> typically new comers to needing assistance and are often very
> emotional, sometimes hostile and demanding, and rarely but regularly
> threatening. Its hard times and they are not used to asking for help.
I have experienced many new comers to the food pantry and all find it
humiliating. A single black mom, very well dressed, came in about two
months ago for the first time. She took her number and had a seat in
the corner were she silently cried. She had been employed in a well
paying job from the looks of her clothes, and during a conversation I
got the feeling she was obviously educated. I talked with her in
private and tried to assure her that there was no shame in asking for
help and that it would only be temporary in her case. Others also
seemed humiliated and embarrassed by the experience. And, yes, I would
be too.
> 4. Hello, I was responding to Beanster's characterization that libs
> typically walk by a beaten man and are more concerned with criminals
> than victims. Rightwingers love those kind of jokes which imply that
> wingnuts are stand-up heroes, without actually helping anybody.
> Bonhoeffer called stuff like this "cheap grace." I think.
Well, to begin with, to have "grace" they would need to be Christian.
I'm not arguing with Bonhoeffer, but I believe a true Christian is a
loving person, willing to give back with his/her time, treasures, and
talents. There is no "cheap grace". You can't earn grace, and
although good works are not necessary, every Christian I know does some
sort of extra work and is generous with his/her time and money. As far
as making a joke about libs walking past a beaten man...... well, that
attitude, true or false, had to start somewhere. I once heard a women
friend in the singing group I once belonged to say that she felt sorry
for this particular criminal who had killed someone. She said he was a
"product of his environment." She showed no such pity for the innocent
person killed as we talked about the crime. I have seen this same
attitude at a national level. Can't recall the name of the guilty
person in jail, but he was black, "a product of his environment", was
found guilty by overwhelming evidence, yet the liberal press and
hollywood types *demanded* he be let go. I think that there is a
history of such things happening. I grew up dirt poor. I was NOT a
product of my environment. No one is. We all have choices in life.
>
> Side note: By the way, Working poor people are not somehow immune to
> voting R or immune to conservative political belief, particularly
> around issues like abortion, unionization, etc.. Karl Rove sure knew
> that in the 2004 Ohio election, and wasn't there this Reagan fellow
> who . . . .
No they aren't. But the poor I see on a daily basis are 100% Obamites,
and the "change" they want is more entitlements. I know, I know,
someone will brand me as a bigoted blowhard bastard for having said
that, but it is the truth. They truly need help, but many have made
bad decisions and continue to make more bad decisions, and ride the
system for all it's worth. They are happy with their lives, afaik, and
wouldn't change if it meant working for what they get.
>
>
> Since to your knowledge no conservative has come into the food pantry
> where you volunteer, to ask for assistance or acted emotionally, you
> apparently have touched the elephant in a different place. ;+))
Well, it all depends on one's perspective, but that has been my
experience, Dave. One must also remember that being a conservative
does not automatically mean that person is a Republican. I grew very
poor and my parents were conservative Democrats. d;o) (After thought:
I doubt my parents, if alive, would today vote Democrat. Their
Democrat party has changed. It is not the party today of JFK.
Remember the first thing he did when he became prez? I will never
forget - he gave everyone a very nice tax break. More money to spend
meant more income for the government.)
>
>
> Dave
> By the way the most hostile and demanding laid off people in my
> experience base were defense workers, engineers and middle managers.
> The most appreciative, positive and eager to retrain (?) . . . people
> like laid off sawmill workers in Snoqualemie and paper workers out on
> the Coast. And all these groups got (get?)enhanced services, and
> deeper support. You figure.
Hmmmm. Well, I know of two 6 figure friends, both engineers, who have
been unemployed for awhile (one for almost two years). They are both
in their 50s, would accept under-paid positions, and both have been
retrained, one as a truck driver. Neither has given up hope of finding
a job. One, married to a working nurse, is slowly spending his 401K
and has moved into a smaller home. They'll survive.
You and I, Dave, are very fortunate. I count my blessings daily, and
I'm sure you do too.
Dave
Tom Littleton
"David LaCourse" <dplac...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:201001041720588930-dplacourse@aolcom...
> No they aren't. But the poor I see on a daily basis are 100% Obamites,
> and the "change" they want is more entitlements.
sure they do......<sigh>
> someone will brand me as a bigoted blowhard bastard for having said that
why should they bother, when your own words do it themselves.
Tom
p.s. David, you shouldn't try to divine the thoughts of those who you
clearly don't understand.
DaveS
>
> Thank you.
>
> I now more fully understand what you seem to have previously meant.
> And, I appreciate your experiences and observations in the area.
> Although marginally greater than mine, conclusions and interpretations
> (and neither of us have predispositions, do we, now :>) ) are somewhat
> different.
>
> cheers
>
> oz, who noted a distinctly different tone, not at all in the
> playground style (perhaps it rubs off from those who shall remain
>
> - Show quoted text -
Good we could have this exchange. As to the tone, sure its different
and I try to meet folks at least half way when I can. My tone with the
Beanster and others when they adopt the strategy of posting the days'
whackjob spin press release is to hit back.
The last few months have been flooded with drug company paid attempts
to sabotage health care reform, straight up lies about Medicare and
diversionary attacks on Obama to block out a number of other stories,
including a very ugly Mideast story on organ trafficking which has
incensed Muslims worldwide, and is currently being heavily censored in
the US.
I decided to start answering the Beansters nonsense the day I saw the
signs at the Tea Party rallies that said "Keep the Government's hands
off my Medicare." That was it for me. I decided on that day that if
the GOP was going to stoop to that level to score some transitory
point with a blatant lie intentionally meant to exploit ill informed
elderly people, it was time to crack some heads. Beanster and even
Dean are just go along puppies in this. But I think radicals have
captured control of what was the Republican Party and heavily
infiltrated ethical conservative circles and are presently a threat to
the Constitution in the same sense that the Russian controlled
Communist Party USA was in the 1940s. And I would hope that every bit
of their propaganda is answered from here on out. With humor if
possible.
As to individuals who are more conservative than I am? Vive la
difference. American patriots are ok by me. However I don't think many
have much of an idea of just who is calling the shots and just how
radical is the ideology at the core of whackdom right now. If you want
to do some self study, track back on the key figures behind the "house
on C street" story, the Dominionists, and the current Uganda story.
Then make up your own mind if that radical theocratic dictatorship is
what you believe American conservatism is all about. They say they
want to overthrow the US government, our democratic republic, and I
believe them.
Cheers
Dave
Giles
You never know what rubs off until you rub up against it. Hey.....pat
yourself on the back and you may get shit on your hands.
And I don't believe you understand anything more than you did 48 hours
ago.
But you could demonstrate that I'm wrong.....if you really wanted
to......right? :)
g.
predispose that.
Giles
Giles
Good god, you are an idiot.
And a pig.
And a liar.
g.
well, yeah, not necessarily in that order.
David LaCourse
Tom, I see and deal with the people. They are pathetic. Most of them
have become dependent on food stamps, welfare, gov housing, food
pantries, etc. Some are *third* generation welfare cases. Three
generations of no progress. It's like we have thrown away these
people. And they DO expect more from Obama. And I don't give a shit
what you think or say about the subject. I live it. I see them. I
hug them or shake their hand. The past three years have been a big eye
opener for me.
Jo and I move to Georgia on Thursday. We both plan to do the same
thing down there.
Go kiss some more ass, Tom. It'll make you feel better.
Dave
David LaCourse
Hey, don't forget to wash your hands in very hot water, lots of soap,
for at least ten minutes. And use a brush for your fingernails.
There's all sorts of germs and shit up there yaknow.
Davey, who has oft wondered why God blessed Wolfgang with such a
marvelous brain only to have him misuse it writing in this nuthouse....
We've got to find something for this little boy to do.
Tom Littleton
hmmm.....we have a 5 year limit on welfare, since the '90s
and they're 3rd generation?? Sometimes, we think we see, but don't, if you
get what I mean. You have judged them 'pathetic'. You have guessed they
'vote Obama all the way', and that they wish to continue a lifestyle of
dependance on your food kitchen. It might not be them that's pathetic.......
Tom
David LaCourse
I know *personally* the three generation remark. My own brother was on
welfare, his youngest followed in his steps, and one of her children
was on welfare. My neice still lives in subsidized housing, as did my
brother until he died. When I see the same people for more than 3 years
coming to get their once-a-month food allowance and they have their
children with their children in tow, yeah, I see third generation
poverty, three generations that have not advanced, who have been lost,
swept between the cracks in the floor, and the only answer you have is
to turn away and ignore them? Shame on you. I call them pathetic
meaning sad, not *your* usual meaning of the word contemptuous pity.
There are five food banks/pantries available to them once a month.
They visit all of them and get enough food for an entire month. That
is sad. A five year limit on welfare? There is no limit on how long
these sad souls can live in subsidized housing or visit the food
pantries.
For two or three weeks after the 2008 election, many of the clients
were overwhelmed with joy. It was like their messiah had finally come
home. I don't know if they even voted, but they sure as hell were glad
that Obama and all of his fluff promises was elected. The same people
three days a week, 52 weeks a year for several years. *That* is
pathetic (my definition, not yours). We have literally lost three
generations of peope because they rely on government entitlements.
But thinks are looking up, Tom. With the redistribution of wealth that
Obama and Emanuel want, these poor souls will have as much as you and I
have -- we'll all be pathetic (my definition, not yours). Of course
the ruling class, Obama, Biden, the Kennedys, Bushes, Cheney, et al
will continue their rape of the people.
Dave
jeff
>
> Jo and I move to Georgia on Thursday. We both plan to do the same thing
> down there.
>
i'll be interested in your comparison of northern, taxachusetts welfare
programs and clientele with those in the north jawja republican
mountains...
jeff
David LaCourse
Republican mountains? News to me. But, I will try and campare the
difference if/when we can find a place to volunteer. We are about 30
miles from *any place*. You, Rachel, and the pup must visit if for no
other reason that to watch the sunset.
Dave
DaveS
SNIP
> three days a week, 52 weeks a year for several years. *That* is
> pathetic (my definition, not yours). We have literally lost three
> generations of peope because they rely on government entitlements.
>
> But thinks are looking up, Tom. With the redistribution of wealth that
> Obama and Emanuel want, these poor souls will have as much as you and I
> have -- we'll all be pathetic (my definition, not yours). Of course
> the ruling class, Obama, Biden, the Kennedys, Bushes, Cheney, et al
> will continue their rape of the people.
>
> Dave
David
You may not like what I am about to say, nor will some others here,
LIB and TORY alike. No blame or personal criticism is intended. I am
talking here about all of us. . . men, sons, husbands, fathers,
uncles, brothers, bros in law, grand fathers, patriarchs, and one of
the responsibilities I believe we have as men.
The research on poverty seems to support the conclusion that the
single biggest factor in breaking an individual's cycle of poverty and
public dependency . . . is the support and intervention of family
members. The public "second chance" programs by and large serve those
people whose family (or church) will not or cannot help them. You want
to help? You have the time and resources? Help your own blood first.
You've tried? Try again.
No blame or criticism here; Ive seen lots of people dumped on the
public till, from families which have the resources to help their own.
I have little basis for thinking that the proportions vary by
political outlook, but libs and tories do talk about it differently.
Probably over generalizing but . . . LIBs try to intercede to get
their family members into services, fudging eligibility, and freeing
themselves from personal responsibility. TORIES tend to draw
behavioral lines in the sand, and when the family member fails, the
Tory removes the support or the promise of support and talks about
"tough love" as the rationale for not taking personal responsibility
for helping the family member. Sure, some intersession and some "tough
love" are always needed. But taking responsibility, earning
patriarchy, keeping things up close and personal are critical for
helping fallen family.
Bottomline is the public and the churches and the food banks and the
shelters have to fill the gap, while both political sides heckle. I
think we all can do better giving a helping hand to needy and
imperfect family members by being persistent, hanging in there and
never giving up..
The other side of this equation sums up like this . . . Family abuse
of other family members is also a large factor in retraining and
substance sobriety program dropouts. In my career I did a number of
post mortems of failed retraining program agencies. ie pawing thru all
the files, the finances, tracking down people, re-interviewing,
looking at outcomes and what happened to clients. One conclusion I
came to was that for these failed service providers, the single most
frequent cause for not completing a training program or employment
readiness program for women and male youth was . . . being beaten, The
termination stats listed these as "health" or "medical" or "Death, "
but the files told the story.
These are harder and more dangerous situations to get involved in
especially so with family. Be that as it may, men can and should step
up when this effects family. Man to man conversations and if
necessary, a little physical counseling can go a long way.
Dave
David LaCourse
Wish I had said that! d;o) I agree whole heartedly, but the
health/medical thingy has changed since I was a kid. When I grew up in
the 40s/early 50s, there was no health care. How the hell did we
survive, I wonder. Today IS different because of the rise in cancer,
hiv, aids, heart disease, etc. But back then, few people got really
sick. I don't remember anyone going to the hospital, and I lost only
one member of the family, a fly fishing/duck hunting uncle who died
from pancreatic cancer in 1959 while I was in Japan protecting your
sorry ass from the communist hordes. d;o)
The male patriarch of a family has aways been important in any family,
if for no other reason than to set an example and teach. One thing
that was very important when I was a boy - grandparents. Just about
every house in my neighborhood had a Nana, or Pop, or gramma/pa. As
well as the love, discipline, teaching of parents, there was the same
responsibility wth grand parents. Grand parents are something that
most kids today only see on special occasions, unless ya have one
living with you. I feel blessed to have had my oldest grandson living
with us for the past five years, and now his brother has moved in and
will watch the house while we are in Georgia
Not to bore you with further pantry stories, but I know of several
women, regular clients of the pantry, that have numerous children with
numerous fathers, and there is little, IF ANY, child support be it
monitary or advisory by said fathers. It is a big problem with our
country, and one that most countries do not have to deal with.
I agree with the main gist of your post, Dave. Like I said, wish I had
said that.
Dave
Tom Littleton
the only answer you have is
> to turn away and ignore them?
no, I'm saying generation to generation poverty has been part of our economy
since this nation started. Nothing 'pathetic' about it, it's built into the
system. It's good that you do something to help. I try to do likewise.
>Shame on you. I call them pathetic
> meaning sad, not *your* usual meaning of the word contemptuous pity. There
> are five food banks/pantries available to them once a month. They visit
> all of them and get enough food for an entire month. That is sad. A five
> year limit on welfare? There is no limit on how long these sad souls can
> live in subsidized housing or visit the food pantries.
no. And, while you might backpedal now and parse your use of pathetic, you
are all too willing to guess about their politics/voting(as if you really
know) and pass judgement elsewhere.
>We have literally lost three generations of peope because they rely on
>government entitlements.
this is where you let politics get in the way of clear thinking. We've had
poverty, generation-to-generation poverty, and you apparently only started
noticing it in the past 20 years. Hell, the same families that were poor in
VA in 1800 still are today. Sure, there are a few that break the cycle, but
the system is set up to make that a challenge. One of the greatest crocks o'
crap ever sold is the Horatio Alger ideal. By and large, our nation just
doesn't work that way. Perhaps, in Obama, they felt they
saw someone who might effect a change in that. In my experiences, most of
the folks who I've encountered receiving welfare, food stamps, going to the
food bank, etc., don't like that situation, and work like the devil to
change it. Sometimes, they get discouraged, but by and large, it is not some
sort of lifestyle choice.
Tom
rw56...@gmail.com
> Wish I had said that! d;o) I agree whole heartedly, but the
> health/medical thingy has changed since I was a kid. When I grew up in
> the 40s/early 50s, there was no health care. How the hell did we
> survive, I wonder.
Must have been the leeches.
Tom Littleton
They truly need help, but many have made
> bad decisions and continue to make more bad decisions, and ride the system
> for all it's worth. They are happy with their lives, afaik, and wouldn't
> change if it meant working for what they get.
and, if you wonder, THIS is the absolute piece of stupidity that drew my
ire. You dare to call yourself a Christian?? Judge not, lest......etc, etc.
Tom
Giles
> "David LaCourse" <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2010010422410250878-dplacourse@aolcom...
>
> hmmm.....we have a 5 year limit on welfare, since the '90s
> and they're 3rd generation??
Depends on what kind of welfare. Remember, you're talking to someone
with a lifetime of first hand experience.
> Sometimes, we think we see, but don't, if you
> get what I mean. You have judged them 'pathetic'. You have guessed they
> 'vote Obama all the way', and that they wish to continue a lifestyle of
> dependance on your food kitchen. It might not be them that's pathetic.......
Well. that's all true enough.
Giles
> On 2010-01-05 05:39:19 -0500, "Tom Littleton" <ThomasLittle...@msn.com> said:
>
>
>
> > "David LaCourse" <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote in message
Why do you people argue with this evil pig?
Seriously.
giles.
Giles
There's lots of germs and shit everywhere. Funny that they never hurt
anybody before the 40s and early 50s, though.
> Davey, who has oft wondered why God blessed Wolfgang with such a
> marvelous brain only to have him misuse it writing in this nuthouse....
> We've got to find something for this little boy to do.
Keep us posted.
pig.
idiot.
g.
Giles
> "David LaCourse" <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote in message
Ire? See, that's what happens one fails to see the irony.....a nearly
complete immunity to low humor.
giles
David LaCourse
Or the mustard plasters.
DaveS
SNIP
Tom, you and I and a few others see some things the same and a few
other things not at all the same. And with Dave and me maybe the
proportions are different but we do share some things in common.
Bottom line for me is whatever our individual starting places, I doubt
there is anyone here who could not do better, do more, be better men
when it comes to some of these social and family issues like we talk
about.
Then there's the question of what do group members really share. In
the wide sense, everyone associated with this group, including
Beanster, M---, bummed out formers, etc everyone shares a raft of
beliefs about the natural world, wild things, and the performance of
the fishing ritual. That's a lot, not everything but allot. Maybe
that's as good as it gets for testosterone friendly groups. But it
doesn't answer the question of why so much effort and ego goes into
the political stuff.(?)
Dave
Meaculpa
jeff
the mountains of nc, tenn, and jawja are notoriously republican. tough
for a liberal democrat to breathe the political air up there. <g>
the pup is still a bit rambunctious for polite company, but i hope we
can visit with y'all at your new place one of these days. it's an easy
drive from snowbird...
jeff
Fred
> question of what do group members really share. In
> the wide sense, everyone associated with this group, including
> Beanster, M---, bummed out formers, etc everyone shares a raft of
> beliefs about the natural world, wild things, and the performance of
> the fishing ritual. That's a lot, not everything but allot. Maybe
> that's as good as it gets for testosterone friendly groups. But it
> doesn't answer the question of why so much effort and ego goes into
> the political stuff.(?)
>
> Dave
> Meaculpa
When youi find the answer to this please let me know
Perhaps the flame wars on ROFF answer your question re political feud and
others as a microcosm
They are definitely ego related
An isolated group w/ similar interests and there are ridiculous wars
I guess that Humans fight politically for ego & testosterone driven
ideals???
In the real world
- Sometimes they kill ea other and a whole lot of effort, lives $$$ ,ego
and testerone is devoted and spent on these real wars
It's nuts
So again if you get the answer please lemme' know
Mea culpa tambien
Soren Kierkegaard
David LaCourse
>
> "David LaCourse" <dplac...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:2010010508470016807-dplacourse@aolcom...
> the only answer you have is
>> to turn away and ignore them?
>
> no, I'm saying generation to generation poverty has been part of our economy
> since this nation started. Nothing 'pathetic' about it, it's built into the
> system. It's good that you do something to help. I try to do likewise.
It's not built into the system, you yo-yo. Every kid in my
neighborhood "made it", even the few the went to jail at 18 yo. Sure,
there must be someplace, probably in WV or Kentucky where poverty
continues generation to generation, but what I see, the people I see
and try to help, are habitual. Many of them have become accustomed to
their way of life. And, like David has noted, there is no male, no
father or grandfather, in their lives. Many of the woman, as I have
stated, have multiple children by multiple men. THAT is a decision.
That is a choise they have made. That is what makes them pathetic
(sad). That is only part of the problem. We have more men and women
(as a % of the over-all population) incarcerated in this country than
any other. Many of those at the pantry have someone behind bars.
>
>
> >Shame on you. I call them pathetic
>> meaning sad, not *your* usual meaning of the word contemptuous pity. There
>> are five food banks/pantries available to them once a month. They visit
>> all of them and get enough food for an entire month. That is sad. A five
>> year limit on welfare? There is no limit on how long these sad souls can
>> live in subsidized housing or visit the food pantries.
>
> no. And, while you might backpedal now and parse your use of pathetic, you
> are all too willing to guess about their politics/voting(as if you really
> know) and pass judgement elsewhere.
I'm not parsing my use of pathetic. I have always used it when
describing the people that I have come in contact with, and its meaning
has always been sad, not contempuous pity like you always use. I may
pity some of these folks, but it is not contempuous. I have no contemp
for them, just pity and sadness.
>> We have literally lost three generations of peope because they rely on
>> government entitlements.
>
> this is where you let politics get in the way of clear thinking.
What politics? That several generations of poor people have become
reliant on the U.S. Government for their existence? Sorry, but that's
not politics, Tom. That pure American history.
> We've had
> poverty, generation-to-generation poverty, and you apparently only started
> noticing it in the past 20 years.
I started noticing it when I was a kid and my father brought home to me
argyle socks, *woolen* argyle socks, that his boss' children wore. I
started noticing poverty when it dawned on me that I had to get a paper
route if I wanted things. And if I really wanted things, like my *own*
argyle socks, I had to pick shade grown tobaccoo at age 14. I noticed
it when we turned on the hot water heater to take a bath. Don't talk
to me about poverty, Tom. But I was more fortunate than many kids in
my neighborhood. My father wasn't a drunk and worked hard, until dying
at age 67 behind the wheel of his tanker rig. He and my mom taught me
to fish, both spin and fly, and I was the only kid in the neighborhood
to go on a vacation every summer with his parents.
> Hell, the same families that were poor in
> VA in 1800 still are today. Sure, there are a few that break the cycle, but
> the system is set up to make that a challenge.
Horse caca. Yeah, there is generation to generation poverty in the
coal country of WV, VA, and Appiliatia in general. And if those kids
were taught better in school that they too could become someone, if
they were taught that serving in the military is a great way to break
out of the same poverty routine they've seen all their lives, perhaps
they could. Challenge, smallenge. Who the hell has NOT been
challenged in life? All of life is a challenge and if you don't learn
that early in your life, you probably are doomed.
> One of the greatest crocks o'
> crap ever sold is the Horatio Alger ideal. By and large, our nation just
> doesn't work that way.
Another horse caca. Tell that to Hector, Norman, Ralph, Richard,
Junior, et al. All kids I grew up with in poverty. We all made it.
Tell that to my two nephews who got bad conduct discharges from the
Army and Navy and have grown up to be successful tradesmen. Tell it to
Bill Gates.
> Perhaps, in Obama, they felt they
> saw someone who might effect a change in that. In my experiences, most of
> the folks who I've encountered receiving welfare, food stamps, going to the
> food bank, etc., don't like that situation, and work like the devil to
> change it. Sometimes, they get discouraged, but by and large, it is not some
> sort of lifestyle choice.
More caca, Tom. Periodically, maybe three or four times a year for at
least a month, we have to fill out some paperwork for each of our
clients. One of the questions is, "Do you work." All answer no. The
next question is "Are you capable of working?" Some say yes, most say
no. Yes, some break out of the system and become self reliant, but as
a whole, most do not (not including elderly in that). That's why we
see them week, month, year after year.
>
And, it is going to get worse, Tom. Count on it. Unemployment is
going to rise because nothing is being done to check it. You do not
raise taxes in hard times. You lower them. The best Dem in my life,
JFK, was aware of that little economic tid bit. Perhaps that is why I
voted for the man.
Dave
David LaCourse
> On Jan 5, 4:39�am, "Tom Littleton" <ThomasLittle...@msn.com> wrote:
>> "David LaCourse" <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:2010010422410250878-dplacourse@aolcom...
>>
>> hmmm.....we have a 5 year limit on welfare, since the '90s
>> and they're 3rd generation??
>
> Depends on what kind of welfare. Remember, you're talking to someone
> with a lifetime of first hand experience.
Yes, along with Frank Reid and every retired military person out there.
Davey
David LaCourse
Get off your high horse, Rev. Tom. They *have* made bad decisions, and
*continue* to make bad decisions. And they seem happy. I talk at
length with many of them and they seem like happy people. But the U.S.
Government has supported them for years and years. It has become a way
of life. I am not, nor do I mean, to judge anyone of these people.
Their choices in life were bad. If that is judging them, then I am
guilty. But, your words come right back at you, Tom. You're judging
me. No mistaking that!
MajorOz
> "David LaCourse" <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2010010508470016807-dplacourse@aolcom...
> the only answer you have is
>
> > to turn away and ignore them?
>
> no, I'm saying generation to generation poverty has been part of our economy
> since this nation started. Nothing 'pathetic' about it, it's built into the
> system. It's good that you do something to help. I try to do likewise.
>
> >Shame on you. I call them pathetic
>
> > meaning sad, not *your* usual meaning of the word contemptuous pity. There
> > are five food banks/pantries available to them once a month. They visit
> > all of them and get enough food for an entire month. That is sad. A five
> > year limit on welfare? There is no limit on how long these sad souls can
> > live in subsidized housing or visit the food pantries.
>
> no. And, while you might backpedal now and parse your use of pathetic, you
> are all too willing to guess about their politics/voting(as if you really
> know) and pass judgement elsewhere.
>
> >We have literally lost three generations of peope because they rely on
> >government entitlements.
>
> this is where you let politics get in the way of clear thinking. We've had
> poverty, generation-to-generation poverty, and you apparently only started
> noticing it in the past 20 years. Hell, the same families that were poor in
> VA in 1800 still are today. Sure, there are a few that break the cycle, but
> the system is set up to make that a challenge.
Well........DUH..........LIFE is a challenge.
>One of the greatest crocks o'
> crap ever sold is the Horatio Alger ideal.
Almost all those achievers I know came from loooowwwww beginnings.
They did so by working hard and recognizing what is important and what
is not.
>By and large, our nation just
> doesn't work that way. Perhaps, in Obama, they felt they
> saw someone who might effect a change in that. In my experiences, most of
> the folks who I've encountered receiving welfare, food stamps, going to the
> food bank, etc., don't like that situation, and work like the devil to
> change it.
Then they chose the wrong devil. Working hard doesn't help. You must
work smart.
Working hard to make a great mud pie gives you a..........mud pie.
> Sometimes, they get discouraged, but by and large, it is not some
> sort of lifestyle choice.
With few exceptions (physical impairment, etc.) is IS a choice.
cheers
oz, who makes choices
MajorOz
> "David LaCourse" <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote in message
Observations are not judgments.
cheers
oz
MajorOz
Could you expand, somewhat, on your intended meaning, please?
cheers
oz
Mark Bowen
"MajorOz" <Maj...@centurytel.net> wrote in message
news:03a4074b-c169-462f...@c3g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
Observations are not judgments.
cheers
oz
Is the above statement an absolute? IYMHO, I mean.
Op
David LaCourse
Wolfgang, aka Giles, has called me a welfare queen for several years.
He refers to my military retirement as welfare.
And, yes, he is bitter about it.
Frank Reid is also retired from the military. What is good for me must
also apply to my friend Frank.
Dave
David LaCourse
She can not be more rambunctious than Jenny. d;o)
Snowbird and some of those streams we fished years ago are on my agenda
for this coming spring.
Dave
jeff
this one's a bit psychotic...but fun and loving.
keep me posted on your visit to the southern barracks... it's freezing
cold down here now, but spring sounds nice.
jeff
jeff
MajorOz
Thank you.
It fits his general demeanor -- a wanna-be who never was.
cheers
oz, USAF (BSC), ret.
David LaCourse
I guess. I've given up long ago trying to figure out the little one
>
> cheers
>
> oz, USAF (BSC), ret.
Welcome aboard the welfare train. There used to be three of us: Frank
Sr., Frank Jr., and me. Frank Sr, eft awhile back. Probably the best
thing he's ever done. d;o)
Dave, CPO, USN, ret.
DaveS
Oz. I am just using your post to respond because its the last. This
post is to all the above.
We can continue this stuff endlessly. Who is to blame society/economy
versus the individual. Fact is its both as far as my personal beliefs/
experience etc.. But that is irrelevant when it comes to helping a
FAMILY member , or a really close friend out of the muck. We on ROFF
can (and will ) go on contrasting our personal beliefs in a
superiority dance cleverly demonstrating "truths" WITHOUT ever DOING
anything long enuf or intensively enuf to effect a change in the lives
of people we care about who ----------------------- (choose one or
more: a. have made bad choices, b. are victims of the recession, c.
voted for the antichrist, d. are pawns in the capitalist game).
Like I said before ... I doubt there is any man here, no matter where
he starts on your or my "scale of proper compassion," who ... could
not do more and start with a down and out family member or close
friend. That's the real choice for most of us.
Dave
Giles
> On 2010-01-05 17:21:22 -0500, "Tom Littleton" <ThomasLittle...@msn.com> said:
>
>
>
> > "David LaCourse" <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote in message
Has it ever occurred to you to wonder whether is anything at all in
this world that you understand? Have you ever wanted to understand
something......anything?
Moron.
Pig.
g.
Giles
Tut tut......your humility is exceeded only by your modesty. In fact,
as is obvious, you make GOOD choices. You and davie are a lot alike.
g.
Giles
Really?
I'm pretty sure Frank has a job.
giles
Giles
> On 2010-01-05 23:53:06 -0500, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> said:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 5, 10:01 pm, David LaCourse <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> On 2010-01-05 21:34:54 -0500, Giles <g_goat...@yahoo.com> said:
>
> >>> On Jan 5, 4:39 am, "Tom Littleton" <ThomasLittle...@msn.com> wrote:
> >>>> "David LaCourse" <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> >>>>news:2010010422410250878-dplacourse@aolcom...
>
> >>>> hmmm.....we have a 5 year limit on welfare, since the '90s
> >>>> and they're 3rd generation??
>
> >>> Depends on what kind of welfare. Remember, you're talking to someone
> >>> with a lifetime of first hand experience.
>
> >> Yes, along with Frank Reid and every retired military person out there.
>
> > Could you expand, somewhat, on your intended meaning, please?
>
> Wolfgang, aka Giles, has called me a welfare queen for several years.
Nogt quite that long, I think. Maybe.
> He refers to my military retirement as welfare.
Nah, I refer to your life as a life on welfare. I've known many a
career military veteran who earned a pension. You, on the other hand,
are a pig.....and a liar.....and an idiot.....and a welfare queen with
a very bad perm.
> And, yes, he is bitter about it.
The one thing I've never been able to hide from the keenest wits in
all of ROFFdom.
> Frank Reid is also retired from the military.
Well, that's true enough, according to what I've heard.
> What is good for me must also apply to my friend Frank.
You would doubtless benefit from a two by four upside the head.....or,
at least it wouldn't do you any harm. Frank, on the other hand, has
already been there and, if we are to believe him (I do) it hasn't done
him all that much good in the long run.
By the way, yes, I think Frank is your friend. But you are not his.
> Dave
pig
idiot
liar
g.
hey Frank! aren't you glad you got invited into this by the one
person in roff who vilifies, excoriates, defames, impunes and just
generally spits on military veterans (of which, if memory still
serves, I am one myself) more than all the rest combined? :)
Giles
Oh? You've met Frank? Interesting. Most of us who know him (and
there are many) would not characterize him as "a wanna-be who never
was." I don't think anyone who knows him could ever doubt that, in
fact, he most certainly IS. Well, for the time being anyway. If we
were an insurance company....... :(
> cheers
>
> oz, USAF (BSC), ret.
Imbecile.
g.
Giles
> On 2010-01-06 12:33:02 -0500, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> said:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jan 6, 7:14 am, David LaCourse <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> On 2010-01-05 23:53:06 -0500, MajorOz <Majo...@centurytel.net> said:
>
> >>> On Jan 5, 10:01 pm, David LaCourse <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>>> On 2010-01-05 21:34:54 -0500, Giles <g_goat...@yahoo.com> said:
>
> >>>>> On Jan 5, 4:39 am, "Tom Littleton" <ThomasLittle...@msn.com> wrote:
> >>>>>> "David LaCourse" <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> >>>>>>news:2010010422410250878-dplacourse@aolcom...
>
> >>>>>> hmmm.....we have a 5 year limit on welfare, since the '90s
> >>>>>> and they're 3rd generation??
>
> >>>>> Depends on what kind of welfare. Remember, you're talking to someo
> > ne
> >>>>> with a lifetime of first hand experience.
>
> >>>> Yes, along with Frank Reid and every retired military person out there
> > .
>
> >>> Could you expand, somewhat, on your intended meaning, please?
>
> >> Wolfgang, aka Giles, has called me a welfare queen for several years.
> >> He refers to my military retirement as welfare.
>
> >> And, yes, he is bitter about it.
>
> >> Frank Reid is also retired from the military. What is good for me must
> >> also apply to my friend Frank.
>
> > Thank you.
>
> > It fits his general demeanor -- a wanna-be who never was.
>
> I guess. I've given up long ago trying to figure out the little one
You're a liar.
> > cheers
>
> > oz, USAF (BSC), ret.
>
> Welcome aboard the welfare train. There used to be three of us: Frank
> Sr., Frank Jr., and me. Frank Sr, eft awhile back.
"us"?? Hee, hee, hee. :)
> Probably the best
> thing he's ever done. d;o)
Better than twenty or more years of service to his country?
> Dave, CPO, USN, ret, IDIOT, PIG, LIAR, QUEEN notret.
g.
Giles
> > question of what do group members really share. In
> > the wide sense, everyone associated with this group, including
> > Beanster, M---, bummed out formers, etc everyone shares a raft of
> > beliefs about the natural world, wild things, and the performance of
> > the fishing ritual. That's a lot, not everything but allot. Maybe
> > that's as good as it gets for testosterone friendly groups. But it
> > doesn't answer the question of why so much effort and ego goes into
> > the political stuff.(?)
>
> > Dave
> > Meaculpa
>
> When youi find the answer to this please let me know
And if he does......how will you know?
> Perhaps the flame wars on ROFF answer your question re political feud and
> others as a microcosm
Flame wars? In ROFF? God bless the children and the idiots. :)
> They are definitely ego related
Ego? In ROFF? :)
> An isolated group w/ similar interests and there are ridiculous wars
Which someone with your acumen would never be tricked into
participating in.......right? :)
> I guess that Humans fight politically for ego & testosterone driven
> ideals???
No. They fight for stupidity.
> In the real world
Oh? You've visited?
> - Sometimes they kill ea other and a whole lot of effort, lives $$$ ,ego
> and testerone is devoted and spent on these real wars
Funny no one but you has noticed till now, huh?
> It's nuts
Nah. It's the ebb and flow of life. It's doing the right thing
because you know it's right.....cuz somebody said so. It's the
inability to refrain from reading and responding to what you loath in
yourself. It's a superiority that manifests itself in reviling what
one disagrees with and wishing it would go away.....so that one could
ignore it.....which one can't.
> So again if you get the answer please lemme' know
And how will you know when someone lets you know?
> Mea culpa tambien
Youa cupla cardsshort.
> Soren Kierkegaard
Funny, you don't LOOK Irish.
g.
Giles
> On 2010-01-05 18:51:02 -0500, "Tom Littleton" <ThomasLittle...@msn.com> said:
>
>
>
> > "David LaCourse" <dplacou...@aol.com> wrote in message
Ah! They're happy! Happy, happy, happy! :)
g.
who has never before wished so strenuously to be a welfare
queen.....with a bad perm.
Giles
And judgments are not observations.
On the other hand, an idiot is pretty much a moron.
Imbecile.
g.
Tom Littleton
of posts. I suppose, at the root of it, I should neither be surprised that
Dave will stretch the truth, or make suppositions, to make some supposed
political point. It's probably my mistake to bother pointing them out.
Still, little in these sorts of exchanges irks me more than the old chestnut
of, "The Poor like being poor and getting handouts. It's a lifestyle
choice." More patent bullshit cannot be slung, and yet, so many seemingly
otherwise decent people entertain themselves(or assuage their dwindling
consciences) with this very notion.
Tom
David LaCourse
Yeah, a wanna-be sumtin or other.
Hey, ain't it grand to get that retirement check every month. <wink
wink> Free medical with TriCare for Life. PX/commissary privs. <big
G>
I retired when I was 38, so there was plenty of time for a civilian
career. I retired from GTE (now Verizon) after 19 years with one of
those golden parachute buy-outs. I was still young enough for yet
another career teaching cops (State Police in VT and MA) high
performance driving/pursuit training. It was one of those jobs were
you say to yourself, "They are actually *paying* me $400/day plus
expenses to do this?" Anyway, I retired from doing that while in my
60s and do nothing now, at age 72, except collect three different
pensions, play with the grand kids, fish and play golf.
Joanne and I are on the road, on our way to a new winter home in
Georgia. We are in Roanoke, VA (697 miles from Mass. in 10 hours) at
bro-in-law. We'll finish the rest of the trip tomorrow. Supposed to
snow!
Be well
Dave
David LaCourse
What a crock of shit, Littleton. Get off your high horse and do
something besides talk liberal shit. Get out there. Meet and serve
those less fortunate than you. Many of the men and women I meet two or
three times a week at the pantry *are* satisfied with their lives, or
at least do not complain about their lot in life. Thanks to your
savior Obama, the unemployment rolls are getting higher, and more and
more people are using any services they can find. These people are NOT
happy. They are down right discouraged, and VERY ANGRY at the fools in
Washington. But the street person who hasn't worked in gawdknowswhen,
you know the one that smells and hasn't bathed in awhile, seems
content. He/she is good natured, quick to be your friend, and is more
than overjoyed for anything you can do for him/her. Ya ever hugged
someone like that, Tom? Ever shake their hand? You probably couldn't
without wanting to wash their filth off of you. You are the one that
is pathetic, Tom. You hide behind your politics saying to yourself, "I
voted for The Man, The Big O. He'll fix everything. I don't have to
look at, serve, or touch these unwashed people. Obama will do it for
me." Horse puckies.
Get out and do it yourself, Tom. Biden, your hero (who makes Dan
Quayle look like a genius) will help you I am sure. Not all the people
are as I have described them above, but they are out there. And there
are others, Tom, the ANGRY ones. You will hear more from them very
soon.
David
(And you kiss ass better than anyone I've ever met. You disappoint me, Thomas)
Fred
On 7-Jan-2010, David LaCourse <dplac...@aol.com> wrote:
> ?" Anyway, I retired from doing that while in my
> 60s and do nothing now, at age 72, except collect three different
> pensions, play with the grand kids, fish and play golf.
Sounds good to me except for the golf.
You have my congratulations and wishes for best of luck.
I am on the brink of retirement myself right now.
Fred
I