Chained quotes
Ahasuerus
Hornung: "Violence is a confession of terrible incompetence"
Asimov: "Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent"
Your mission, should you chose to accept it, is to come up with the
opposite numbers by Heinlein and Pournelle to complete (continue?) the
chain! :-)
--
Ahasuerus
Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes
Ahasuerus <ahas...@not-for-mail.org> spake:
"He was opposed to the use of force. Force, he believed, was the last
resort of incompetence; he had said so frequently enough since this
operation had begun. Of course, he was absolutely right, though not in
the way he meant. Only the incompetent wait until the last extremity to
use force, and by then, it is usually too late to use anything, even
prayer."
-H.Beam Piper, "A Slave Is A Slave", _Empire_
--
<a href="http://kuoi.asui.uidaho.edu/~kamikaze/"> Mark Hughes </a>
"No one is safe. We will print no letters to the editor. We will give no
space to opposing points of view. They are wrong. The Underground Grammarian
is at war and will give the enemy nothing but battle." -TUG, v1n1
Jordan S. Bassior
>"He was opposed to the use of force. Force, he believed, was the last
>resort of incompetence; he had said so frequently enough since this
>operation had begun. Of course, he was absolutely right, though not in
>the way he meant. Only the incompetent wait until the last extremity to
>use force, and by then, it is usually too late to use anything, even
>prayer."
>-H.Beam Piper, "A Slave Is A Slave", _Empire_
That's one of the _many_ beautifully-expressed truths in Piper's stories which
makes liberals _hate_ them ...
--
Sincerely Yours,
Jordan
--
Aaron Denney
*sigh*. I consider myself a liberal, and yet I love Piper's stories. Please
drop the groundless, off-topic, attacks.
Or am I not really a liberal, I just haven't realized it yet?
Let's see, I give to the ACLU, to the EFF, I hate most of the Republican
Right's agenda, I voted for Nader last election, I'm pro-choice, ...
--
Aaron Denney
-><-
Reverend Sean O'Hara
It is possible to be a liberal and still support the military.
Now finding a liberal politician to vote for on that basis is another
matter ....
--
Reverend Sean O'Hara
You too can be an ordained minister: http://www.ulc.org
Culture Editor for Expulsion: http://www.expulsion.org (new & improved)
"So what state is Wales in?" - G. W. Bush (quoted by Charlotte Church)
William T. Hyde
> On 06 Nov 2001 07:53:46 GMT, Jordan S. Bassior <jsba...@aol.com> wrote:
> > Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes said:
> >
> > >"He was opposed to the use of force. Force, he believed, was the last
> > >resort of incompetence; he had said so frequently enough since this
> > >operation had begun. Of course, he was absolutely right, though not in
> > >the way he meant. Only the incompetent wait until the last extremity to
> > >use force, and by then, it is usually too late to use anything, even
> > >prayer."
> > >-H.Beam Piper, "A Slave Is A Slave", _Empire_
> >
> > That's one of the _many_ beautifully-expressed truths in Piper's stories which
> > makes liberals _hate_ them ...
>
> *sigh*. I consider myself a liberal, and yet I love Piper's stories. Please
> drop the groundless, off-topic, attacks.
When I wish for the impossible I tend to concentrate
on a nice $10,000,000 inheritance from a previously
unknown relative. It's a far more plausible scenario.
> Or am I not really a liberal, I just haven't realized it yet?
Been reading this group much? The term "liberal" is
defined by the conservatives. You'll have to ask
them for permission to call yourself a liberal.
> Let's see, I give to the ACLU, to the EFF, I hate most of the Republican
> Right's agenda, I voted for Nader last election, I'm pro-choice, ...
Oh, great. Now you're on the homelandfuhrer's little
list. Don't try to get on any airplanes.
William Hyde
EOS Department
Duke University
Charles R Martin
> Oh, great. Now you're on the homelandfuhrer's little
> list. Don't try to get on any airplanes.
You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush is
a Nazi, you're going to make a lot of enemies, not least of them me.
Disagreeing with him politically is one thing; calling him "Führer" is
another.
Not to mention the fact that were things as you imply, you in
particular would already be in one of the camps.
For all the occasional similarity, Duke is not a concentration camp.
--
Our enemies are never villains in their own eyes, but that does not make them
less dangerous. Appeasement, however, nearly always makes them more so.
-- Don Dixon
______________________________________________________________________________
Charles R (Charlie) Martin Broomfield, CO 40N 105W
Sea Wasp
>
> For all the occasional similarity, Duke is not a concentration camp.
It's a university; that would make it a LACK of concentration camp.
--
Sea Wasp http://www.wizvax.net/seawasp/index.htm
/^\
;;; _Morgantown: The Jason Wood Chronicles_, at
http://www.hyperbooks.com/catalog/20040.html
Captain Button
> wno...@ugcs.caltech.edu (Aaron Denney) writes:
>> On 06 Nov 2001 07:53:46 GMT, Jordan S. Bassior <jsba...@aol.com> wrote:
[ H. Beam Piper quote about Force ]
>> > That's one of the _many_ beautifully-expressed truths in Piper's stories which
>> > makes liberals _hate_ them ...
>>
>> *sigh*. I consider myself a liberal, and yet I love Piper's stories. Please
>> drop the groundless, off-topic, attacks.
[ snip ]
>> Or am I not really a liberal, I just haven't realized it yet?
> Been reading this group much? The term "liberal" is
> defined by the conservatives. You'll have to ask
> them for permission to call yourself a liberal.
Permission? I thought the approved procedure was that conservatives [1]
slap the label "liberal" on things they dislike, and it is then eternal
and indelible.
[1] Of course, now we must recurse into the question of how *they*
got labelled "conservatives".
ObSF:
QUEEN: "Don't let that distress you; you shall be returned as a
Liberal-Conservative, and your legs shall be our peculiar care."
- "Iolanthe" by Gilbert and Sullivan
[ It has fairies, so it is fantasy and thus SF. ]
--
"We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in
tolerance and free speech," - David Brin
Captain Button - but...@io.com
Lee DeRaud
wrote:
>wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu (William T. Hyde) writes:
>
>> Oh, great. Now you're on the homelandfuhrer's little
>> list. Don't try to get on any airplanes.
>
>You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush is
>a Nazi, you're going to make a lot of enemies, not least of them me.
>Disagreeing with him politically is one thing; calling him "Führer" is
>another.
>
>Not to mention the fact that were things as you imply, you in
>particular would already be in one of the camps.
>
>For all the occasional similarity, Duke is not a concentration camp.
No problem: VMI and The Citadel are just up the road...
Lee
William T. Hyde
> wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu (William T. Hyde) writes:
>
> > Oh, great. Now you're on the homelandfuhrer's little
> > list. Don't try to get on any airplanes.
>
> You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush is
> a Nazi,
Bush is not the homelandfuhrer. Tom Ridge is the
homelandfuhrer.
Ridge's praise, a few years ago, of the efficiency
of the Third Reich's civilian administration makes
the joke legitimate, I think. In addition the
fact that his new department sounds rather third
reichish has been noted by many others.
you're going to make a lot of enemies,
I already have several hundred million enemies,
Charles, and more every day.
not least of them me.
A bizarre overreaction.
If I ever decide that W is a nazi you will
know for two reasons (1) I will tell you, and
(2) I will be doing it from New Zealand.
> Not to mention the fact that were things as you imply, you in
> particular would already be in one of the camps.
The patriot act takes care of that. I can be
detained indefinitely for just about anything.
A traffic violation, for example.
First they came for the foreigners, and you did not
complain, because ...
Sorry if that last reference offends you, but I
simply can not make myself delete it.
John Schilling
If you believe it to be appropriate, then aren't you demonstrating
roughly the same level of intelligence as the Jews who remained in
Germany through the 1930s because the pay was good?
--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
*schi...@spock.usc.edu * for success" *
*661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *
@hotmail.com.invalid Eric D. Berge
(William T. Hyde) wrote:
>Charles R Martin <crma...@indra.com> writes:
>
>> wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu (William T. Hyde) writes:
>>
>> > Oh, great. Now you're on the homelandfuhrer's little
>> > list. Don't try to get on any airplanes.
>>
>> You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush is
>> a Nazi,
>
> Bush is not the homelandfuhrer. Tom Ridge is the
> homelandfuhrer.
Does his office have an enforcement arm, and is it called the Homeland
State Police?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric D. Berge
(remove spaces for valid address)
Clay lies still, but blood's a rover
Breath's a ware that will not keep
Up, lad! When the journey's over
There'll be time enough to sleep.
- A.E.Housman, "Reveille"
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ahasuerus
> On 06 Nov 2001 07:53:46 GMT, Jordan S. Bassior <jsba...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Mark 'Kamikaze' Hughes said:
>>
>> >"He was opposed to the use of force. Force, he believed, was the last
>> >resort of incompetence; he had said so frequently enough since this
>> >operation had begun. Of course, he was absolutely right, though not in
>> >the way he meant. Only the incompetent wait until the last extremity to
>> >use force, and by then, it is usually too late to use anything, even
>> >prayer."
>> >-H.Beam Piper, "A Slave Is A Slave", _Empire_
Oh, well done, Mark! :)
>> That's one of the _many_ beautifully-expressed truths in Piper's stories
>> which makes liberals _hate_ them ...
Now, *that* is a most peculiar observation! Piper is pretty much
universally considered to be that rare bird, a SF writer with fairly
strong and transparent political views whose stories are well liked by
those who disagree with his politics.
> *sigh*. I consider myself a liberal, and yet I love Piper's stories.
> Please drop the groundless, off-topic, attacks. [snip]
ObSF: What's interesting about this particular quote chain - and I hoped
somebody would notice it - is that the Hornung original had no ideological
connotations whatsoever: *of course* that's what Raffles would say given
his modus operandi! The fact that it quickly became, in its various and
sundry incarnations, a political football tells us quite a bit about the
XXth century...
--
Ahasuerus
jonathan mccall
> > That's one of the _many_ beautifully-expressed truths in Piper's stories which
> > makes liberals _hate_ them ...
>
> *sigh*. I consider myself a liberal, and yet I love Piper's stories. Please
> drop the groundless, off-topic, attacks.
Hey, I'm the same way, if it's any comfort. Shelf full of Heinlein and
Weber...and I had no idea they were supposed to be making me mad.
>
> Or am I not really a liberal, I just haven't realized it yet?
Liberal is what I point at and say it is!
--
Jonathan McCall
Charles R Martin
I don't think it counts if you have to _ask_ to be admitted.
Charles R Martin
> Charles R Martin <crma...@indra.com> writes:
> > You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush is
> > a Nazi,
>
> Bush is not the homelandfuhrer. Tom Ridge is the
> homelandfuhrer.
>
> Ridge's praise, a few years ago, of the efficiency
> of the Third Reich's civilian administration makes
> the joke legitimate, I think. In addition the
> fact that his new department sounds rather third
> reichish has been noted by many others.
>
> you're going to make a lot of enemies,
>
> I already have several hundred million enemies,
> Charles, and more every day.
>
> not least of them me.
>
> A bizarre overreaction.
It's the drugs, right? Or have you really become so besotted with the
leftist POV that you imagine that _everyone_ figures it's just not
really an insult to imply someone is a Nazi if they're farther right
than you are.
> Sorry if that last reference offends you, but I
> simply can not make myself delete it.
I doubt I like the PATRIOT Act any more than you do, frankly. I just
have the sense to be working on it politically rather than whining
about how They are going to Come Get Me.
Michael Ward
"William T. Hyde" <wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu> wrote in message
news:yv7zpu6vw...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu...
> Charles R Martin <crma...@indra.com> writes:
>
> > wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu (William T. Hyde) writes:
> >
> > > Oh, great. Now you're on the homelandfuhrer's little
> > > list. Don't try to get on any airplanes.
> >
> > You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush is
> > a Nazi,
>
> Bush is not the homelandfuhrer. Tom Ridge is the
> homelandfuhrer.
Tom Ridge is the secretary of Homeland Security.
It isn't Charles' fault that he can't decipher
your inept joeks.
>
> Ridge's praise, a few years ago, of the efficiency
> of the Third Reich's civilian administration makes
> the joke legitimate, I think.
IIRC the Third Reich's civilian administration
was very effiecient. I'm pretty sure I've
heard liberals point this out too. I guess they
were really closet Nazis.
> In addition the
> fact that his new department sounds rather third
> reichish has been noted by many others.
>
And millions of people beleive that 9/11 is
just the latest development in a world wide
Zionist conspiracy the control the world.
Is that also true?
> you're going to make a lot of enemies,
>
> I already have several hundred million enemies,
> Charles, and more every day.
>
If 100 million people had the foggiest
idea who you are and what kind of
hate you're spewing, I'm sure this would be true.
> not least of them me.
>
> A bizarre overreaction.
Not in the least. Your comparison of Tom Ridge
to the Nazis cuts both ways. If Ridge is like the
Nazis then the Nazis are like Ridge. This trivializes
one of the most destructive political regimes of
the 20th century and is as offensive as if you had
"no one died in the holocaust."
Perhaps you should think before you type. And
consider the fact the even though you may not
like the current administartion, you don't have
to worry about the police arresting you because
one of your children fresh from Nazi youth camp
told the SS you weren't loyal enough to the
fatherland.
The level of ignoriance that you display is truly frightening.
>
> If I ever decide that W is a nazi you will
> know for two reasons (1) I will tell you, and
> (2) I will be doing it from New Zealand.
>
>
> > Not to mention the fact that were things as you imply, you in
> > particular would already be in one of the camps.
>
> The patriot act takes care of that. I can be
> detained indefinitely for just about anything.
> A traffic violation, for example.
No. You're either completely clueless or you're
just making stuff up to support your case.
from Rueters:
The new law will:
-- Make it a crime to knowingly harbor a terrorist.
-- Allow the attorney general to hold foreigners
considered suspected terrorists for up to seven
days before charging them with a crime or
beginning deportation proceedings.
-- Let federal authorities obtain court orders
for ``roving wiretaps,'' which would allow
them to tap any phone a suspected foreign
terrorist might use rather than a single phone.
-- Make it easier for U.S. criminal investigators
and intelligence officers to share information.
-- Give the U.S. Treasury Department
(news - web sites) new powers to target
foreign nations and banks deemed money-
laundering threats.
-- Permit law enforcement to obtain a
subpoena to get from Internet providers
records about the e-mail transmissions
of suspected terrorists.
and you can see the complete report at:
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20011026/pl/attack_bush_dc_4.html
A person could make a preety good case that
many of these provisions are over restrictive
and even unhelpful. But instead you grossly
exagerate the effects of the law. This actually
plays in the hands of the laws supporters as you are
helping to perpetuate the myth that evyeryone
who oppose the patriot act is an anti-American
nutcase.
And if Congress ever did pass a law such as the one you
suggest it would be shot down by the courts immediatley.
>
> First they came for the foreigners, and you did not
> complain, because ...
>
> Sorry if that last reference offends you, but I
> simply can not make myself delete it.
Once again, what's so offensive about it is that you
think Nazi Germany was anything like the US
today. A lot of people died because our
forefathers beleived the same thing two
generations ago.
>
> William Hyde
> EOS Department
> Duke University
Part of me feels really stupid for wasting my time
replying to this crap. And I can't help
but feel that I just fed a troll. But this is the
sort of nonsense as I just can see go by
without a response.
Mike
Michael Ward
"Eric D. Berge" <eric_berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:511hutkhs0uuvkgcs...@4ax.com...
> On 06 Nov 2001 18:48:19 -0500, wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu
> (William T. Hyde) wrote:
>
> >Charles R Martin <crma...@indra.com> writes:
> >
> >> wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu (William T. Hyde) writes:
> >>
> >> > Oh, great. Now you're on the homelandfuhrer's little
> >> > list. Don't try to get on any airplanes.
> >>
> >> You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush is
> >> a Nazi,
> >
> > Bush is not the homelandfuhrer. Tom Ridge is the
> > homelandfuhrer.
>
> Does his office have an enforcement arm, and is it called the Homeland
> State Police?
Ironically, the criticism that Homeland security seems
to get the most (froom liberals and conservatiives alike)
is that it doesn't have any well defied purpose or
power. Maybe he meant FBI Director Robert Mueller.
Or maybe he's just an idiot.
Mike
Michael Ward
"Lee DeRaud" <lee.d...@boeing.com> wrote in message
news:6vjguts2h3ver4af0...@4ax.com...
But are these kinds of quips really appropriate.
Please don't get me wrong. I don't beleive every joke
hase to be politically correct, but a lot of people died
in those concetrations camps. And some of the survivors
are still alive today.
A place like the Citadel were people chose to go
is nothing like a concentration camp, and it seems
that the comparison trivializes the horrors of
concentraions camps especially in the contect of
Nazi concentraion camps were people were
gassed to death.
I'm sure I've made similar jokes and I regret it.
And I know your intention was to poke fun at the
Citadel not trivialize anything associated with the
Holocaust.
Just some food for thought.
Mike
> Lee
Michael Ward
"Charles R Martin" <crma...@indra.com> wrote in message
news:m3adxzj...@localhost.localdomain...
> wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu (William T. Hyde) writes:
>
> > Charles R Martin <crma...@indra.com> writes:
>
> > > You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush is
> > > a Nazi,
> >
> > Bush is not the homelandfuhrer. Tom Ridge is the
> > homelandfuhrer.
> >
> > Ridge's praise, a few years ago, of the efficiency
> > of the Third Reich's civilian administration makes
> > the joke legitimate, I think. In addition the
> > fact that his new department sounds rather third
> > reichish has been noted by many others.
> >
> > you're going to make a lot of enemies,
> >
> > I already have several hundred million enemies,
> > Charles, and more every day.
> >
> > not least of them me.
> >
> > A bizarre overreaction.
>
> It's the drugs, right? Or have you really become so besotted with the
> leftist POV that you imagine that _everyone_ figures it's just not
> really an insult to imply someone is a Nazi if they're farther right
> than you are.
I think he knows what an insult it is and uses the word
with malice. Otherwise he could have called Ridge a
fascists. I often tease liberals by calling them socialists,
but I would never call them Stalinists as that would
be comparing them to another brutal political tyrant.
>
> > Sorry if that last reference offends you, but I
> > simply can not make myself delete it.
>
> I doubt I like the PATRIOT Act any more than you do, frankly. I just
> have the sense to be working on it politically rather than whining
> about how They are going to Come Get Me.
>
Good for you. William's rantings could be seen by
some as typical of the mindset of those who have
concerns about the Patriot Act. I'm glad someone
is providing a counter example.
Mike
Eric Walker
[...]
>Once again, what's so offensive about it is that you
>think Nazi Germany was anything like the US
>today. A lot of people died because our
>forefathers beleived the same thing two
>generations ago.
While I have no burning desire to get caught in this crossfire,
I think the salient point is that he is not saying that Nazi
Germany is anything like the U.S. today, he is saying that the
non-Nazi Germany that soon thereafter became the Nazi Germany
might be like the U.S. today. He can answer for himself, but
that's how it looks to me, and, if that is so, then the grounds
of the debate shift radically.
Also: John Schilling said:
>If you believe it to be appropriate, then aren't you
>demonstrating roughly the same level of intelligence as the
>Jews who remained in Germany through the 1930s because the pay
>was good?
Have you ever looked in any detail into what is involved in
trying to emigrate to New Zealand, or even Canada, with the idea
of permanent residence and eventual citizenship in mind? If
not, do so sometime.
--
Cordially,
Eric Walker, webmaster
Great Science-Fiction & Fantasy Works
http://owlcroft.com/sfandf
Reverend Sean O'Hara
>
> Aaron Denney <wno...@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
> > *sigh*. I consider myself a liberal, and yet I love Piper's stories.
> > Please drop the groundless, off-topic, attacks. [snip]
>
> ObSF: What's interesting about this particular quote chain - and I hoped
> somebody would notice it - is that the Hornung original had no ideological
> connotations whatsoever: *of course* that's what Raffles would say given
> his modus operandi! The fact that it quickly became, in its various and
> sundry incarnations, a political football tells us quite a bit about the
> XXth century...
>
political ideology in it (at least taken out of context). The idea that
you have to be a conservative to support the use of military force is
one of the most asinine claims I've ever heard.
Eric Walker
[...]
>The idea that you have to be a conservative to support the use
>of military force is one of the most asinine claims I've ever
>heard.
You, lucky fellow, have led a sheltered life . . . .
Lee DeRaud
wrote:
>Lee DeRaud <lee.d...@boeing.com> writes:
>
>> On 06 Nov 2001 12:48:51 -0700, Charles R Martin <crma...@indra.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu (William T. Hyde) writes:
>> >
>> >> Oh, great. Now you're on the homelandfuhrer's little
>> >> list. Don't try to get on any airplanes.
>> >
>> >You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush is
>> >a Nazi, you're going to make a lot of enemies, not least of them me.
>> >Disagreeing with him politically is one thing; calling him "Führer" is
>> >another.
>> >
>> >Not to mention the fact that were things as you imply, you in
>> >particular would already be in one of the camps.
>> >
>> >For all the occasional similarity, Duke is not a concentration camp.
>>
>> No problem: VMI and The Citadel are just up the road...
>
>I don't think it counts if you have to _ask_ to be admitted.
Think of it as evolution in action.
Lee
_ berge @hotmail.com.invalid Eric D. Berge
<but...@bermuda.io.com> wrote:
>Wild-eyed conspiracy theorists insist that on 06 Nov 2001 14:28:33 -0500,
>William T. Hyde <wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu> wrote:
>>> Or am I not really a liberal, I just haven't realized it yet?
>
>> Been reading this group much? The term "liberal" is
>> defined by the conservatives. You'll have to ask
>> them for permission to call yourself a liberal.
>
>Permission? I thought the approved procedure was that conservatives [1]
>slap the label "liberal" on things they dislike, and it is then eternal
>and indelible.
Brings to mind a co-worker who asked me, a few months ago, "Eric, are
you a liberal?".
I asked him to tell me what liberal was, and I would tell him if I was
one or not.
He looked startled, hemmed and hawed for a moment, and then announced
"A liberal is someone who believes in excessive taxation".
He got very insulted when I laughed at him.
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Berge
(remove spaces for address)
Therefore since the world has still
Much good, but much less good than ill,
I'd face it as a wise man would,
o_ \ > And train for ill and not for good.
<| ' ,_|
___/_>____o)____ - A.E. Housman, "A Shropshire Lad"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_ berge @hotmail.com.invalid Eric D. Berge
>But the Piper quote, while militaristic, doesn't have any inherent
>political ideology in it (at least taken out of context). The idea that
>you have to be a conservative to support the use of military force is
>one of the most asinine claims I've ever heard.
Well, it's Fat Jordan making it, so you are pretty much free to
disregard.
_ berge @hotmail.com.invalid Eric D. Berge
<ward...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>"Eric D. Berge" <eric_berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
>> >> You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush is
>> >> a Nazi,
>> >
>> > Bush is not the homelandfuhrer. Tom Ridge is the
>> > homelandfuhrer.
>>
>> Does his office have an enforcement arm, and is it called the Homeland
>> State Police?
>
>Ironically, the criticism that Homeland security seems
>to get the most (froom liberals and conservatiives alike)
>is that it doesn't have any well defied purpose or
>power. Maybe he meant FBI Director Robert Mueller.
>Or maybe he's just an idiot.
You need to read more carefully; he clearly was referencing Tom Ridge,
and I was commenting on the fact that the Poobah of Homeland Security
sounds like someone who out to be running the Secret State Police (=
Geheime Statspolizei).
Michael Ward
"Eric D. Berge" <eric _ berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:ivhiut4dt7tt3f60s...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2001 03:17:08 GMT, "Michael Ward"
> <ward...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Eric D. Berge" <eric_berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
>
> >> >> You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush
is
> >> >> a Nazi,
> >> >
> >> > Bush is not the homelandfuhrer. Tom Ridge is the
> >> > homelandfuhrer.
> >>
> >> Does his office have an enforcement arm, and is it called the Homeland
> >> State Police?
> >
> >Ironically, the criticism that Homeland security seems
> >to get the most (froom liberals and conservatiives alike)
> >is that it doesn't have any well defied purpose or
> >power. Maybe he meant FBI Director Robert Mueller.
> >Or maybe he's just an idiot.
>
> You need to read more carefully; he clearly was referencing Tom Ridge,
I'm well aware of that. That what's so ironic. Ridge
is completely powerless. I was suggesting that if
Willaims wanted to blindly compare someone to
the leader of the enforcment arm of a fascist
government he might want to use the FBI director.
It still wouldn't be true but at least it would be make
some sense.
Mike
Michael Ward
"Eric Walker" <ra...@owlcroft.com> wrote in message
news:enfsjbjypebsgpbz...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2001 03:09:35 GMT, Michael Ward wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >Once again, what's so offensive about it is that you
> >think Nazi Germany was anything like the US
> >today. A lot of people died because our
> >forefathers beleived the same thing two
> >generations ago.
>
> While I have no burning desire to get caught in this crossfire,
> I think the salient point is that he is not saying that Nazi
> Germany is anything like the U.S. today, he is saying that the
> non-Nazi Germany that soon thereafter became the Nazi Germany
> might be like the U.S. today. He can answer for himself, but
> that's how it looks to me, and, if that is so, then the grounds
> of the debate shift radically.
>
debate ; )
Actaully, while you do make a good point,
even if you are correct much of what I said stands
unaltered. William still equated Tom Ridge with
Hitler which is doubly offensive: Ridge isn't
that bad and Hitler wasn't that good.
As for the rest, the idea that the Patroit Act
makes us like Germany when Hitler first took
power is less ridiculous than the notion that
it makes us like Germany a few years later,
but it still remains ridiculous.
If William wanted to make a case that some
provisions of the Patriot act where dangerous
and started us down a dangerous slope. He
could probablly make a compelling case. Instead
he's chosen to compare Ridge with Hitler. These
are two very different things.
Mike
Michael Ward
"Eric D. Berge" <eric _ berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
> On Tue, 06 Nov 2001 20:45:26 GMT, Captain Button
> <but...@bermuda.io.com> wrote:
>
> >Wild-eyed conspiracy theorists insist that on 06 Nov 2001 14:28:33 -0500,
> >William T. Hyde <wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu> wrote:
>
> >>> Or am I not really a liberal, I just haven't realized it yet?
> >
> >> Been reading this group much? The term "liberal" is
> >> defined by the conservatives. You'll have to ask
> >> them for permission to call yourself a liberal.
> >
> >Permission? I thought the approved procedure was that conservatives [1]
> >slap the label "liberal" on things they dislike, and it is then eternal
> >and indelible.
>
> Brings to mind a co-worker who asked me, a few months ago, "Eric, are
> you a liberal?".
>
> I asked him to tell me what liberal was, and I would tell him if I was
> one or not.
At this point he should have gone back to work as you've already answered
his question.
Anyone who is not a liberal will say so when ask.
Mike
Michael Ward
>
> [...]
>
> >The idea that you have to be a conservative to support the use
> >of military force is one of the most asinine claims I've ever
> >heard.
>
> You, lucky fellow, have led a sheltered life . . . .
>
support miliary action?
Almost Everyone in congress supports the current
military action. So are there no liberals in Congress?
Mike
Charles R Martin
>> (me)
> > It's the drugs, right? Or have you really become so besotted with the
> > leftist POV that you imagine that _everyone_ figures it's just not
> > really an insult to imply someone is a Nazi if they're farther right
> > than you are.
>
> I think he knows what an insult it is and uses the word
> with malice.
Nah. You think?
(Thanks for the kind comments, btw)
Louann Miller
<ward...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>"Eric D. Berge" <eric _ berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
>> Brings to mind a co-worker who asked me, a few months ago, "Eric, are
>> you a liberal?".
>>
>> I asked him to tell me what liberal was, and I would tell him if I was
>> one or not.
>
>At this point he should have gone back to work as you've already answered
>his question.
>
>Anyone who is not a liberal will say so when ask.
Yeah. Everybody knows that a liberal is anyone who believes a person
in a free society has a right to be a liberal. This makes them very
easy to spot.
Charles R Martin
> Brings to mind a co-worker who asked me, a few months ago, "Eric, are
> you a liberal?".
>
> I asked him to tell me what liberal was, and I would tell him if I was
> one or not.
>
> He looked startled, hemmed and hawed for a moment, and then announced
> "A liberal is someone who believes in excessive taxation".
>
> He got very insulted when I laughed at him.
Good. I'm tired of morons on that side of the spectrum, too.
Charles R Martin
> "Eric D. Berge" <eric _ berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:qhhiuto5fkofas3pp...@4ax.com...
> > On Tue, 06 Nov 2001 20:45:26 GMT, Captain Button
> > <but...@bermuda.io.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Wild-eyed conspiracy theorists insist that on 06 Nov 2001 14:28:33 -0500,
> > >William T. Hyde <wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >>> Or am I not really a liberal, I just haven't realized it yet?
> > >
> > >> Been reading this group much? The term "liberal" is
> > >> defined by the conservatives. You'll have to ask
> > >> them for permission to call yourself a liberal.
> > >
> > >Permission? I thought the approved procedure was that conservatives [1]
> > >slap the label "liberal" on things they dislike, and it is then eternal
> > >and indelible.
> >
> > Brings to mind a co-worker who asked me, a few months ago, "Eric, are
> > you a liberal?".
> >
> > I asked him to tell me what liberal was, and I would tell him if I was
> > one or not.
>
> At this point he should have gone back to work as you've already answered
> his question.
>
> Anyone who is not a liberal will say so when ask.
No, I'd probably have asked.
Lee DeRaud
hotmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Wed, 07 Nov 2001 03:17:08 GMT, "Michael Ward"
><ward...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Eric D. Berge" <eric_berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
>
>>> >> You know, William, if you insist on making references implying Bush is
>>> >> a Nazi,
>>> >
>>> > Bush is not the homelandfuhrer. Tom Ridge is the
>>> > homelandfuhrer.
>>>
>>> Does his office have an enforcement arm, and is it called the Homeland
>>> State Police?
>>
>>Ironically, the criticism that Homeland security seems
>>to get the most (froom liberals and conservatiives alike)
>>is that it doesn't have any well defied purpose or
>>power. Maybe he meant FBI Director Robert Mueller.
>>Or maybe he's just an idiot.
>
>You need to read more carefully; he clearly was referencing Tom Ridge,
>and I was commenting on the fact that the Poobah of Homeland Security
>sounds like someone who out to be running the Secret State Police (=
>Geheime Statspolizei).
Yup. And you'd *think* Bush (being from Texas) would have realized
that "Department of Public Safety" (AKA "Texas Rangers") would be a
perfectly good name for Ridge's new organization, without all the, er,
Teutonic associations.
Lee
James Bodi
---OTOH, 'public safety' has a nasty, jacobin sound to those who've read
about the terror. I think naming security departments is difficult: all
the words have such chilly connotations now. How about 'Office for Propagation
of Truth, Justice and the American Way'?
>
>Lee
Charles R Martin
> Yup. And you'd *think* Bush (being from Texas) would have realized
> that "Department of Public Safety" (AKA "Texas Rangers") would be a
> perfectly good name for Ridge's new organization, without all the, er,
> Teutonic associations.
Of all the good things I think might be said of George W, one of them
surely is _not_ "facility and sensitivity with language".
James Nicoll
James Bodi <jab...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>>Yup. And you'd *think* Bush (being from Texas) would have realized
>>that "Department of Public Safety" (AKA "Texas Rangers") would be a
>>perfectly good name for Ridge's new organization, without all the, er,
>>Teutonic associations.
>
>---OTOH, 'public safety' has a nasty, jacobin sound to those who've read
>about the terror. I think naming security departments is difficult: all
>the words have such chilly connotations now. How about 'Office for Propagation
>of Truth, Justice and the American Way'?
The Department of Enforced Secular Tranquility. DEST. Hrm.
Must some way to get from that to agents of DESTiny but I don't see it.
William T. Hyde
Time to get serious.
To make things clear, nobody in the government
is a nazi. Aside from a few lunatics active
today, the nazi party was a localized event,
whose time is long gone. I have doubts about
the committment to full democracy of various people
in your government and mine, but none of them
are nazis.
Is my position clear?
The original comment was partially inspired by the
cases of a couple of people who have been kept
off of airplanes for odd reasons (having the wrong
book), while others have snuck through with a
caseload of knives, and recently, a stun gun.
That is somewhat sad, but also rather funny.
Hence my joke.
> It's the drugs, right? Or have you really become so besotted with the
> leftist POV that you imagine that _everyone_ figures it's just not
> really an insult to imply someone is a Nazi if they're farther right
> than you are.
Classic. The "leftist" POV leads to a complete
disconnect from reality, you assure me, at the
same time as you exhibit your outrage over the
word "homelandfuhrer". Plus a gratuitous
drug reference. You are allowed to make any
accusation because it is "humour".
Ah, but you will say, that's different. The
nazi associations are just too strong, too
evil. Perhaps so, but in that case Ridge
should have kept his mouth shut rather than
praise any aspect of the regime. He also
prased Mussolini, but "homelanduce" somehow
doesn't roll off the tongue in the same way.
Perhaps it is the nature of the debate. In the
past the words "stalinist" and "gulag" were used
rather freely by the right wing types I was
debating. My response was to laugh, not to
get offended.
> I doubt I like the PATRIOT Act any more than you do, frankly. I just
> have the sense to be working on it politically
Good. Which of the 98 senators who voted for it
are you going to defeat? Or is this a "Feingold in 2004"
movement?
rather than whining
> about how They are going to Come Get Me.
They're not. But as you made a joke about camps,
I thought it was fair to point out the provisions
for non citizens, as I understand them. Sorry if
that offended you.
Dan Swartzendruber
says...
> Eric D. Berge <eric _ berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> writes:
>
> > Brings to mind a co-worker who asked me, a few months ago, "Eric, are
> > you a liberal?".
> >
> > I asked him to tell me what liberal was, and I would tell him if I was
> > one or not.
> >
> > He looked startled, hemmed and hawed for a moment, and then announced
> > "A liberal is someone who believes in excessive taxation".
> >
> > He got very insulted when I laughed at him.
>
> Good. I'm tired of morons on that side of the spectrum, too.
Yep.
Michael Ward
> "Michael Ward" <ward...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
> >> (me)
> > > It's the drugs, right? Or have you really become so besotted with the
> > > leftist POV that you imagine that _everyone_ figures it's just not
> > > really an insult to imply someone is a Nazi if they're farther right
> > > than you are.
> >
> > I think he knows what an insult it is and uses the word
> > with malice.
>
> Nah. You think?
I guess I DID kinda state the obvious there, oh well : )
James Bodi
---It could be organized by state. The Department of Enforced Secular Tranquility
In New York has a catchy acronym, and a hit single theme song by, you guessed
it, feminist icons Destiny's Child. I can see the recruiting video already.
>
>
>
Charles R Martin
> Charles R Martin <crma...@indra.com> writes:
>
>
> Time to get serious.
>
> To make things clear, nobody in the government
> is a nazi. Aside from a few lunatics active
> today, the nazi party was a localized event,
> whose time is long gone. I have doubts about
> the committment to full democracy of various people
> in your government and mine, but none of them
> are nazis.
>
> Is my position clear?
Perfectly. Thank you.
Charles R Martin
Actually, I'm finding it very difficult to work and play well with
morons in general recently. Life's too short.
(This probably explains why I was laid off, too.)
Michael Ward
"Louann Miller" <loua...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1jmiutod6jl4fgcia...@4ax.com...
Everyone knows the diffenece between conservatives
and liberals is that conservatives are anti-choice
and liberals are pro-choice. For instance:
Conservatives give you no choice: You must be one of us
Liberals give you one choice: Be one of us.
Mike
Charles R Martin
> ---It could be organized by state. The Department of Enforced Secular Tranquility
> In New York has a catchy acronym, and a hit single theme song by, you guessed
> it, feminist icons Destiny's Child. I can see the recruiting video already.
Cool. COuld you send me a copy?
Terry Austin
"Michael Ward" <ward...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:yjcG7.101964$WW.59...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> "Eric D. Berge" <eric _ berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> wrote in message
> news:qhhiuto5fkofas3pp...@4ax.com...
> > On Tue, 06 Nov 2001 20:45:26 GMT, Captain Button
> > <but...@bermuda.io.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Wild-eyed conspiracy theorists insist that on 06 Nov 2001
14:28:33 -0500,
> > >William T. Hyde <wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >>> Or am I not really a liberal, I just haven't realized it yet?
> > >
> > >> Been reading this group much? The term "liberal" is
> > >> defined by the conservatives. You'll have to ask
> > >> them for permission to call yourself a liberal.
> > >
> > >Permission? I thought the approved procedure was that conservatives
[1]
> > >slap the label "liberal" on things they dislike, and it is then eternal
> > >and indelible.
> >
> > Brings to mind a co-worker who asked me, a few months ago, "Eric, are
> > you a liberal?".
> >
> > I asked him to tell me what liberal was, and I would tell him if I was
> > one or not.
>
> At this point he should have gone back to work as you've already answered
> his question.
>
> Anyone who is not a liberal will say so when ask.
>
Terry Austin
John Schilling
>Also: John Schilling said:
OK, fill me in. Exactly how difficult is it for a person who,
like Mr. Hyde, is a Canadian citizen holding a Canadian passport,
to "emigrate" to Canada?
He may be welcome, in spite of his recent offensive comments, to
stay in the United States as long as he likes. But he is certainly
welcome to leave whenever he likes; there are no barriers there.
--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
*schi...@spock.usc.edu * for success" *
*661-951-9107 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *
William T. Hyde
> wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu (William T. Hyde) writes:
>
> >> Not to mention the fact that were things as you imply, you in
> >> particular would already be in one of the camps.
>
>
> If you believe it to be appropriate,
I don't. As I said, if I believed that I would
not be living on this continent.
Charles made a joke (or so I thought), I followed up on it.
then aren't you demonstrating
> roughly the same level of intelligence as the Jews who remained in
> Germany through the 1930s because the pay was good?
As I understand it quite a few were unable to
leave. Many of those who left only got as
far as Poland or Czechoslovakia, which didn't
work in the long run.
Those who could have left but didn't were those
who assumed that the anti-semitism was a mere
politicl ploy, IIRC.
@hotmail.com.invalid Eric D. Berge
wrote:
>Lee DeRaud <lee.d...@boeing.com> writes:
>
>> Yup. And you'd *think* Bush (being from Texas) would have realized
>> that "Department of Public Safety" (AKA "Texas Rangers") would be a
>> perfectly good name for Ridge's new organization, without all the, er,
>> Teutonic associations.
>
>Of all the good things I think might be said of George W, one of them
>surely is _not_ "facility and sensitivity with language".
Whassamatta, you don't approve of Operation Infinite Justice, which is
rooting out Evildoers and their Evil Weapons? Perhaps you opposed the
Patriot Act? Are you not a Patriot? Shame on you!
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric D. Berge
(remove spaces for valid address)
Clay lies still, but blood's a rover
Breath's a ware that will not keep
Up, lad! When the journey's over
There'll be time enough to sleep.
- A.E.Housman, "Reveille"
------------------------------------------------------------------
@hotmail.com.invalid Eric D. Berge
>
>Lee DeRaud <lee.d...@boeing.com> wrote:
>>>You need to read more carefully; he clearly was referencing Tom Ridge,
>>>and I was commenting on the fact that the Poobah of Homeland Security
>>>sounds like someone who out to be running the Secret State Police (=
>>>Geheime Statspolizei).
>>
>>Yup. And you'd *think* Bush (being from Texas) would have realized
>>that "Department of Public Safety" (AKA "Texas Rangers") would be a
>>perfectly good name for Ridge's new organization, without all the, er,
>>Teutonic associations.
>
>---OTOH, 'public safety' has a nasty, jacobin sound to those who've read
>about the terror. I think naming security departments is difficult: all
>the words have such chilly connotations now. How about 'Office for Propagation
>of Truth, Justice and the American Way'?
That's a good one. But I like to keep things simple - how 'bout
"Comittee For State Security"?
Brian McGuinness
unless they are of age and give their consent.
And even then they should be let out at least
once a day.
--- Brian
William T. Hyde
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2001 03:09:35 GMT, Michael Ward wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> >Once again, what's so offensive about it is that you
> >think Nazi Germany was anything like the US
> >today. A lot of people died because our
> >forefathers beleived the same thing two
> >generations ago.
>
> While I have no burning desire to get caught in this crossfire,
Wise, but I don't think there is going to be one.
> I think the salient point is that he is not saying that Nazi
> Germany is anything like the U.S. today, he is saying that the
> non-Nazi Germany that soon thereafter became the Nazi Germany
> might be like the U.S. today. He can answer for himself, but
> that's how it looks to me, and, if that is so, then the grounds
> of the debate shift radically.
Oddly, I had typed a paragraph about Chancellor
Bruening, pointing out that one could date the
beginning of the end to his leadership, even though
he was definitely no nazi. IIRC he broke with his
own party to vote against the enabling act, and
eventually wound up in a camp.
He acted from the best motives, I believe,
but in the end was one of those who undermined
the Weimar democracy.
I was going to continue with Von Papen and his role,
bt then I decided that this was too serious a
reply for what was a joke (and misread Charles'
comments as at least to some degree joking),
and deleted it. Comparisons are difficult
anyway, as one could easily argue that democracy
had never really taken root in Weimar, that the
judiciary was always political, the army too
powerful, and so on.
> Also: John Schilling said:
>
> >If you believe it to be appropriate, then aren't you
> >demonstrating roughly the same level of intelligence as the
> >Jews who remained in Germany through the 1930s because the pay
> >was good?
>
> Have you ever looked in any detail into what is involved in
> trying to emigrate to New Zealand, or even Canada, with the idea
> of permanent residence and eventual citizenship in mind?
It is highly erratic. One fine scientist, American
by birth, was denied permanent residence on the
excuse that he had a contract, not a job. At the
same time I was employing another scientist, part
time, on a less secure contract. He was let in.
Madness.
Michael Ward
"Terry Austin" <tau...@hyperbooks.com> wrote in message
news:9sbpr...@enews2.newsguy.com...
No
that's the simple answer.
But my liberal friends tend to think of me as
moderately conservative.
My conservative friends on the other hand
think of me as moderately liberal.
The two politcal issues that mean the most
to me are criminal justice and abortion.
Even though I think a lot of guilty people
are not punished in our current system and
that this a very serious problem, I'm primarily
concerned with how the accused don't seem to
get the benift of the doubt in this country as
they are supposed to. Particulary not if they
are poor or black or both.
It's unforgivable that we allow prosecutors to
buy testimony with plea deals, especially
considering that freedom is more valuable
than money and it's illegal to offer money
for testimony. And the appeals system
is a joke that usually rubber stamps
convictions. If your public defender
fails to raise an objection during trial
then you can't appeal that issue:
That is you can go to jail for having a stupid
lawyer. And I hate the fact that once
convicted no matter how much evidence
amassed that you are actually innocent it
usually takes a prime time news magazine
special to get you out of prison.
As for abortion I am pro-life and don't
understand why someone can kill a baby
an hour before it's born but not an
hour after.
Generally I'm guided by a concern
for life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness. Everyone;s life should
be protected. Everyone's liberty
so long as it does not take away
someone elses life. Everyone's happiness
so long as it doesn't take away someone's
life or liberty. When two people's
lives, liberties, or happiness are in conflict,
then things get interesting.
Mike
>
> Terry Austin
>
>
Charles R Martin
You bet your sweet ass I am. I want my drink.
Oh, wait ... is that "turtle"?
Charles R Martin
> On 07 Nov 2001 09:27:58 -0700, Charles R Martin <crma...@indra.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Lee DeRaud <lee.d...@boeing.com> writes:
> >
> >> Yup. And you'd *think* Bush (being from Texas) would have realized
> >> that "Department of Public Safety" (AKA "Texas Rangers") would be a
> >> perfectly good name for Ridge's new organization, without all the, er,
> >> Teutonic associations.
> >
> >Of all the good things I think might be said of George W, one of them
> >surely is _not_ "facility and sensitivity with language".
>
> Whassamatta, you don't approve of Operation Infinite Justice, which is
> rooting out Evildoers and their Evil Weapons? Perhaps you opposed the
> Patriot Act? Are you not a Patriot? Shame on you!
To be fair, I don't think he's responsible for the PATRIOT Act
(typographical note: is _is_ an acronym. Gack.)
But if you're going to make fun of his linguistic skills, I don't
think you sshould stop so quickly.
Charles R Martin
> On 7 Nov 2001 10:23:16 -0600, "James Bodi" <jab...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >Lee DeRaud <lee.d...@boeing.com> wrote:
>
> >>>You need to read more carefully; he clearly was referencing Tom Ridge,
> >>>and I was commenting on the fact that the Poobah of Homeland Security
> >>>sounds like someone who out to be running the Secret State Police (=
> >>>Geheime Statspolizei).
> >>
> >>Yup. And you'd *think* Bush (being from Texas) would have realized
> >>that "Department of Public Safety" (AKA "Texas Rangers") would be a
> >>perfectly good name for Ridge's new organization, without all the, er,
> >>Teutonic associations.
> >
> >---OTOH, 'public safety' has a nasty, jacobin sound to those who've read
> >about the terror. I think naming security departments is difficult: all
> >the words have such chilly connotations now. How about 'Office for Propagation
> >of Truth, Justice and the American Way'?
>
> That's a good one. But I like to keep things simple - how 'bout
> "Comittee For State Security"?
The acronym isn't near as cute in English.
Charles R Martin
Sounds good.
Maybe we could start on flogging dead horses next?
Charles R Martin
> > Have you ever looked in any detail into what is involved in
> > trying to emigrate to New Zealand, or even Canada, with the idea
> > of permanent residence and eventual citizenship in mind?
>
> It is highly erratic. One fine scientist, American
> by birth, was denied permanent residence on the
> excuse that he had a contract, not a job. At the
> same time I was employing another scientist, part
> time, on a less secure contract. He was let in.
Was this Canada?
Immigration in Canada is _so_ weird. I've had work permits in Canada,
I've had the $50 buy-at-the airport good-for-one-meeting permits, and
I've been waved through without a pause.
I have _yet_ to figure out how they decided which happened when.
William T. Hyde
> Brings to mind a co-worker who asked me, a few months ago, "Eric, are
> you a liberal?".
>
> I asked him to tell me what liberal was, and I would tell him if I was
> one or not.
>
> He looked startled, hemmed and hawed for a moment, and then announced
> "A liberal is someone who believes in excessive taxation".
>
> He got very insulted when I laughed at him.
I was once told, by a self described conservative,
that I couldn't be a liberal because I invest in the
stock market. Exactly the comment I would have
expected from an extreme socialist. He wouldn't believe me
when I mentioned that Keynes was a very successful investor.
Tapio Erola
> On 7 Nov 2001 10:23:16 -0600, "James Bodi" <jab...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >Lee DeRaud <lee.d...@boeing.com> wrote:
>
> >>>You need to read more carefully; he clearly was referencing Tom Ridge,
> >>>and I was commenting on the fact that the Poobah of Homeland Security
> >>>sounds like someone who out to be running the Secret State Police (=
> >>>Geheime Statspolizei).
> >>
> >>Yup. And you'd *think* Bush (being from Texas) would have realized
> >>that "Department of Public Safety" (AKA "Texas Rangers") would be a
> >>perfectly good name for Ridge's new organization, without all the, er,
> >>Teutonic associations.
> >
> >---OTOH, 'public safety' has a nasty, jacobin sound to those who've read
> >about the terror. I think naming security departments is difficult: all
> >the words have such chilly connotations now. How about 'Office for Propagation
> >of Truth, Justice and the American Way'?
The reason that most of the word combinations have some chill is that
there is only limited number of descriptive terms and ways of
combining them in coherent strings. And most of those names have been
used
Besides 'Office for Propagation of Truth, Justice and the American Way'
sounds far too much like "Office for the Propagation of Virtue and
Prevention of Vice"
> That's a good one. But I like to keep things simple - how 'bout
> "Comittee For State Security"?
That has some slavic left-wing associations, unfortunately.
(Komitet Gosudarstvennoi Bezopasnosti is the transliterated
Russian translation).
ObSF: "Imperial Security" might just have best descriptive effect...
--
Tapio Erola (t...@tols17.oulu.fi) No mail to t...@rak061.oulu.fi please!
"Say what you will about the sweet miracle of unquestioning faith.
I consider the capacity for it terrifying." --Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
Pardoz
<radi...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Liberal is what I point at and say it is!
No, that's SF. A liberal is a conservative who's been arrested.
--
All things are possible, except skiing thru a revolving door.
Monty Fauntleroy
wrote:
>Dan Swartzendruber <dsw...@druber.com> writes:
>
>> In article <m3pu6uf...@localhost.localdomain>, crma...@indra.com
>> says...
>> > Eric D. Berge <eric _ berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> writes:
>> >
>> > > Brings to mind a co-worker who asked me, a few months ago, "Eric, are
>> > > you a liberal?".
>> > >
>> > > I asked him to tell me what liberal was, and I would tell him if I was
>> > > one or not.
>> > >
>> > > He looked startled, hemmed and hawed for a moment, and then announced
>> > > "A liberal is someone who believes in excessive taxation".
>> > >
>> > > He got very insulted when I laughed at him.
>> >
>> > Good. I'm tired of morons on that side of the spectrum, too.
>>
>> Yep.
>
>
>Actually, I'm finding it very difficult to work and play well with
>morons in general recently. Life's too short.
>
>(This probably explains why I was laid off, too.)
how do you stand yourself, then?
Louann Miller
<ward...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>Even though I think a lot of guilty people
>are not punished in our current system and
>that this a very serious problem, I'm primarily
>concerned with how the accused don't seem to
>get the benift of the doubt in this country as
>they are supposed to. Particulary not if they
>are poor or black or both.
>
>It's unforgivable that we allow prosecutors to
>buy testimony with plea deals, especially
>considering that freedom is more valuable
>than money and it's illegal to offer money
>for testimony. And the appeals system
>is a joke that usually rubber stamps
>convictions. If your public defender
>fails to raise an objection during trial
>then you can't appeal that issue:
>That is you can go to jail for having a stupid
>lawyer. And I hate the fact that once
>convicted no matter how much evidence
>amassed that you are actually innocent it
>usually takes a prime time news magazine
>special to get you out of prison.
You might've SAID you were a liberal before this all started.
(demi-grin).
Seriously, I've toyed with the thumbnail definitions that liberals are
people who want to change society to make it better, while
conservatives are people who want to avoid changing it because that
would make it worse.
There are several problems with these definitions, I know. For one
thing, many self-labeled conservatives these days are actually
reactionaries. In the literal dictionary sense rather than the
perjorative one -- they feel not that society should stop changing for
the worse, but that it's already worse and needs to be changed back.
There's also the debate about what constitutes better vs. worse, which
I strongly suspect will never end. (exhibit A from 1910
http://www.dur.ac.uk/~dcs6mpw/gkc/books/whats_wrong.html )
Worse yet, the targets keep moving. In 1950, the idea of a black
general was insanely and radically liberal, verging on communism.
Today Colin Powell is a respected conservative. (OTOH one of Truman's
other ideas, the Marshall Plan, is apparently now liberal -- we're not
into nation-building.)
Louann
Eric Walker
>"Eric Walker" <ra...@owlcroft.com> writes:
[...]
>OK, fill me in. Exactly how difficult is it for a person who,
>like Mr. Hyde, is a Canadian citizen holding a Canadian
>passport, to "emigrate" to Canada?
Well, got me there--I didn't know his citizenship. In the
larger scale, though, many U.S. citizens who express similar
sentiments are met with similar remarks. It is very difficult
to emigrate to Canada or New Zealand, and, I suspect, most of
the lands one might think of in such a context.
--
Cordially,
Eric Walker, webmaster
Great Science-Fiction & Fantasy Works
http://owlcroft.com/sfandf
Lee DeRaud
wrote:
>"Terry Austin" <tau...@hyperbooks.com> writes:
>>
>> Are you a conservative?
>
>You bet your sweet ass I am. I want my drink.
>
>Oh, wait ... is that "turtle"?
"And the 'Dennis Miller Obscure Reference Award' goes to..."
IOW, huh?!? (No more coffee for *you* today, bucko!)
Lee
William T. Hyde
> On 7 Nov 2001 09:37:38 -0800, John Schilling wrote:
>
> >"Eric Walker" <ra...@owlcroft.com> writes:
>
> [...]
>
> >OK, fill me in. Exactly how difficult is it for a person who,
> >like Mr. Hyde, is a Canadian citizen holding a Canadian
> >passport, to "emigrate" to Canada?
>
> Well, got me there--I didn't know his citizenship.
That was idiotic of me. I thought your question
odd, and that should have clued me into the fact
that my citizenship had not been mentioned on
this thread (others know it, and I assumed ...)
Sorry about that. I shouldn't post before
the first coffee of the day hits.
I also forgot about NAFTA visas. If you have a
university degree and a job offer in Canada
acceptance is automatic. You must renew every
year, but as long as your employer agrees, this
is also automatic (well, you have to stay out
of trouble with the law, I assume).
The unfortunate case I referred to earlier was
trying for the more difficult permanent status,
so that he could actually vote and become a
citizen. Exactly the kind of person any rational
country would encourage. Luckily for you, we
were idiots.
In the
> larger scale, though, many U.S. citizens who express similar
> sentiments are met with similar remarks. It is very difficult
> to emigrate to Canada or New Zealand, and, I suspect, most of
> the lands one might think of in such a context.
I had a friend (PhD, math) who almost made it to
Austrlia. But he was slightly over 40 and had
a minor medical problem. Were either of these
not the case he would have, I'm told, been
allowed in.
William T. Hyde
> wth...@godzilla5.acpub.duke.edu (William T. Hyde) writes:
>
> > > Have you ever looked in any detail into what is involved in
> > > trying to emigrate to New Zealand, or even Canada, with the idea
> > > of permanent residence and eventual citizenship in mind?
> >
> > It is highly erratic. One fine scientist, American
> > by birth, was denied permanent residence on the
> > excuse that he had a contract, not a job. At the
> > same time I was employing another scientist, part
> > time, on a less secure contract. He was let in.
>
> Was this Canada?
Yes.
>
> Immigration in Canada is _so_ weird. I've had work permits in Canada,
See my other post. You can now get in on a
free trade visa easily enough.
> I've had the $50 buy-at-the airport good-for-one-meeting permits,
I've never heard of these. When was this?
I invited American speakers and consultants
when I lived up north, and nobody ever mentioned
such a fee. Does it apply only to certain professions?
Joseph Michael Bay
> I was once told, by a self described conservative,
> that I couldn't be a liberal because I invest in the
> stock market. Exactly the comment I would have
> expected from an extreme socialist. He wouldn't believe me
> when I mentioned that Keynes was a very successful investor.
I'm not sure what an "extreme" socialist is, but since
a socialist believes that the people should own the means
of production, and stock ownership is in effect ownership
of the means of production, and since we're people, that
socialists should be putting all of their money into stocks.
Or that investors are socialists. I'm not sure.
--
Chimes peal joy. Bah. Joseph Michael Bay
Icy colon barge Cancer Biology
Frosty divine Saturn Stanford University
When encryption is outlawed, fO$t ^@3sVe) %4iG Vx@| /jNGe5x6@^.
Captain Button
[ What to call the secret police when they aren't that secret ]
>> >---OTOH, 'public safety' has a nasty, jacobin sound to those who've read
>> >about the terror. I think naming security departments is difficult: all
>> >the words have such chilly connotations now. How about 'Office for Propagation
>> >of Truth, Justice and the American Way'?
> The reason that most of the word combinations have some chill is that
> there is only limited number of descriptive terms and ways of
> combining them in coherent strings. And most of those names have been
> used
> Besides 'Office for Propagation of Truth, Justice and the American Way'
> sounds far too much like "Office for the Propagation of Virtue and
> Prevention of Vice"
>> That's a good one. But I like to keep things simple - how 'bout
>> "Comittee For State Security"?
Don't forget the Bureau Of State Security.
ObSF: Christopher Stasheff has fun with organization acronyms
in his Warlock series, including SPITE, and, uhh ... I forget the
rest but he had some neat ones.
--
"We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in
tolerance and free speech," - David Brin
Captain Button - but...@io.com
Rick
news:2m3jutsd851ap6n8e...@4ax.com...
> Seriously, I've toyed with the thumbnail definitions that liberals are
> people who want to change society to make it better, while
> conservatives are people who want to avoid changing it because that
> would make it worse.
Actually, a liberal in today's nomenclature would be someone who wants the
GOVERNMENT to change society to make it better, while a conservative wants
people to change society without government help.
@hotmail.com.invalid Eric D. Berge
wrote:
>Eric D. Berge <eric_berge @ hotmail.com.invalid> writes:
>
>> On 7 Nov 2001 10:23:16 -0600, "James Bodi" <jab...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>Besides 'Office for Propagation of Truth, Justice and the American Way'
>sounds far too much like "Office for the Propagation of Virtue and
>Prevention of Vice"
>
>> That's a good one. But I like to keep things simple - how 'bout
>> "Comittee For State Security"?
>
>That has some slavic left-wing associations, unfortunately.
>(Komitet Gosudarstvennoi Bezopasnosti is the transliterated
>Russian translation).
Nooo? You don't say!
Terry Austin
"Charles R Martin" <crma...@indra.com> wrote in message
news:m3bsie7...@localhost.localdomain...
Now explain what a conservative is, and how it differs from a liberal.
Without any subjective definitions.
Terry Austin
Terry Austin
So, is there any other criteria for being a liberal beyond an unwillingness
to admit to being a liberal? Or is this just a "someone I don't like" sort
of definition?
Terry Austin
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<ward...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>"Eric Walker" <ra...@owlcroft.com> wrote in message
>news:enfsjbjypebsgpbz...@news.cis.dfn.de...
>> On Wed, 07 Nov 2001 00:55:35 -0500, Reverend Sean O'Hara wrote:
>>
>> >The idea that you have to be a conservative to support the use
>> >of military force is one of the most asinine claims I've ever
>> >heard.
>>
>> You, lucky fellow, have led a sheltered life . . . .
>>
>Why, because he recognizes that liberals do sometimes
>support miliary action?
No, because he's never heard many spectacularly asinine claims. That
one's only really asinine.
--
The Misenchanted Page: http://www.sff.net/people/LWE/ Last update 5/28/01
My latest novel is NIGHT OF MADNESS
Michael Ward
In some respect I suppose I am. Though i think
progressive is probably a bit more accurate in my case.
But I agree with the Republicans about a third of
the time (about as often as I agree with the Democrats)
And I'm sure I'm not a liberal Republincan because
that apperently means one who his pro-abortion
and registered Republican and I'm neither.
>
> Seriously, I've toyed with the thumbnail definitions that liberals are
> people who want to change society to make it better, while
> conservatives are people who want to avoid changing it because that
> would make it worse.
>
> There are several problems with these definitions, I know. For one
> thing, many self-labeled conservatives these days are actually
> reactionaries. In the literal dictionary sense rather than the
> perjorative one -- they feel not that society should stop changing for
> the worse, but that it's already worse and needs to be changed back.
> There's also the debate about what constitutes better vs. worse, which
> I strongly suspect will never end. (exhibit A from 1910
>
That last statement is undoubtably true. As for your
definitions, they aren't bad. I think the best thing is
not to define them though. If you follow politics at
all you get a feel for what people mean by liberal
and conservative without a concrete definition. And this
allows the words to varie by context. Liberal
means slightly different things in the US than it does in
the world for instance.
Mike
Michael Ward
I think you missunderstood me. I din't say a liberal
would answer the question "no" (that's what a non-liberal
would do). I said only a liberal would refuse to answer
the question. That is, some liberals would answer "yes"
and some (those who are embarassed by their liberalism)
would avoid the question.
Mike
>
> Terry Austin
>
>
Michael Ward
Only if you can explain the difference between red
and green without refering to examples.
Mike
> Terry Austin
>
>
Michael Ward
"Lawrence Watt-Evans" <lawr...@clark.net> wrote in message
news:wTiG7.11257$ym4.4...@iad-read.news.verio.net...
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2001 15:25:04 GMT, "Michael Ward"
> <ward...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> >"Eric Walker" <ra...@owlcroft.com> wrote in message
> >news:enfsjbjypebsgpbz...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> >> On Wed, 07 Nov 2001 00:55:35 -0500, Reverend Sean O'Hara wrote:
> >>
> >> >The idea that you have to be a conservative to support the use
> >> >of military force is one of the most asinine claims I've ever
> >> >heard.
> >>
> >> You, lucky fellow, have led a sheltered life . . . .
> >>
> >Why, because he recognizes that liberals do sometimes
> >support miliary action?
>
> No, because he's never heard many spectacularly asinine claims. That
> one's only really asinine.
>
Charles R Martin
> how do you stand yourself, then?
Don't even go there, poopsie.
Charles R Martin
> Seriously, I've toyed with the thumbnail definitions that liberals are
> people who want to change society to make it better, while
> conservatives are people who want to avoid changing it because that
> would make it worse.
Actually, that's not bad. Hmmm.
>
> There are several problems with these definitions, I know. For one
> thing, many self-labeled conservatives these days are actually
> reactionaries. In the literal dictionary sense rather than the
> perjorative one -- they feel not that society should stop changing for
> the worse, but that it's already worse and needs to be changed back.
> There's also the debate about what constitutes better vs. worse, which
> I strongly suspect will never end. (exhibit A from 1910
> http://www.dur.ac.uk/~dcs6mpw/gkc/books/whats_wrong.html )
>
> Worse yet, the targets keep moving. In 1950, the idea of a black
> general was insanely and radically liberal, verging on communism.
> Today Colin Powell is a respected conservative. (OTOH one of Truman's
> other ideas, the Marshall Plan, is apparently now liberal -- we're not
> into nation-building.)
I don't think nation building is necessarily liberal, as much as it's
been so horribly unsuccessful in the near past.
On the other hand, if we could come up with some way to successfully
build pluralistic (or at least diversity-tolerant), non-coersive
nations out of places like Iran and Afghanistan and Russia, I think
we'd have something.
Charles R Martin
I think there we're beginning to play with what's a "conservative"
versus what the underlying political philosophy is. I think this is
why Pournelle's 2-dimensional mapping is interesting, although now I
think we're really seeing three dimensions:
state control -> absolute personal liberty
communal property -> individual property
messing with things is risky -> messing with things is good
Terry Austin
criteria? Or is it just "someone I don't like."?
Terry Austin
Terry Austin
angstroms, green would be light with a wavelength of 5100-5600
angstroms.
Your turn.
Terry Austin
Charles R Martin
Great. No coffee for me. Now we've got the Coffee nazi.
>
> Lee
You're just not old enough. There's a thing, mostly now played at by
extremely old traveling salesmen, called "the Order of the Turtle" or
some such. The total meaning of it is this:
if you meet someone, you say "are you a turtle?"
if they say "you bet your sweet ass I am" you have to buy them a
drink.
if they don't know what the hell you're talking about, then they
buy you a drink as their initiation into the Order.
repeat as necessary.
Charles R Martin
> > > Are you a conservative?
> >
> > You bet your sweet ass I am. I want my drink.
>
> Now explain what a conservative is, and how it differs from a liberal.
> Without any subjective definitions.
See, there's another one who didn't get it.
Charles R Martin
> Besides 'Office for Propagation of Truth, Justice and the American Way'
> sounds far too much like "Office for the Propagation of Virtue and
> Prevention of Vice"
That "prevention of vice" part really sounds like a bummer, though.
Charles R Martin
> The unfortunate case I referred to earlier was
> trying for the more difficult permanent status,
> so that he could actually vote and become a
> citizen. Exactly the kind of person any rational
> country would encourage. Luckily for you, we
> were idiots.
ALL governments are idiots.
In fact, I suspect this applies to any organization with more than two
layers of hierarchy.
Charles R Martin
I could never figure it out either. As far as I could tell, it applies
to people whose passport numbers were picked in a lottery -- I could
go into Canada twice in a week, pay it once and not the next.
Charles R Martin
> >Why, because he recognizes that liberals do sometimes
> >support miliary action?
>
> No, because he's never heard many spectacularly asinine claims. That
> one's only really asinine.
Yes, it's important to keep a sense of proportion in these things.
R. Tang
Well, isn't the way to figure this out is to actually TRY it once
or twice? You're bound to get some failures, but you're not going to get
any successes without trying. [As you can tell, I'm not an
isolationist...]
--
-
-Roger Tang, gwan...@u.washington.edu, Artistic Director PC Theatre
- Editor, Asian American Theatre Revue [NEW URL][Yes, it IS new]
- http://www.aatrevue.com
William December Starr
Charles R Martin <crma...@indra.com> said:
>>> For all the occasional similarity, Duke is not a concentration
>>> camp.
>>
>> No problem: VMI and The Citadel are just up the road...
>
> I don't think it counts if you have to _ask_ to be admitted.
ObSF: Whatshername the rebellious time traveler sneaking *into*
Auschwitz in J.R. Dunn's _Days of Cain_.
-- William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
William December Starr
Tapio Erola <t...@localhost.localdomain> said:
> The reason that most of the word combinations have some chill is
> that there is only limited number of descriptive terms and ways of
> combining them in coherent strings. And most of those names have
> been used
>
> Besides 'Office for Propagation of Truth, Justice and the American
> Way' sounds far too much like "Office for the Propagation of Virtue
> and Prevention of Vice"
"Technological Hierarchy for the Removal of Undesirables and the
Subjugation of Humanity."
Sorry, I just had to say that.
Mark Atwood
> >
> > Now explain what a conservative is, and how it differs from a liberal.
> > Without any subjective definitions.
>
> Only if you can explain the difference between red
> and green without refering to examples.
A digital spectroscope works perfectly well at both demonstrating and
defining the difference.
--
Mark Atwood | I'm wearing black only until I find something darker.
m...@pobox.com | http://www.pobox.com/~mra
Michael Ward
I like a lot of liberals. So your question doesn't
even make sense. Granted liberals who are
embarassed to be called liberals get on my nerves,
but I don't dislike them for it, and they are the exception
anyway since most liberals are proud to be liberals.
In fact I don't know they shouldn't be.
Mike
>
> Terry Austin
>
>
Terry Austin
> "Terry Austin" <tau...@hyperbooks.com> writes:
>
> > > > Are you a conservative?
> > >
> > > You bet your sweet ass I am. I want my drink.
> >
> > Now explain what a conservative is, and how it differs from a liberal.
> > Without any subjective definitions.
>
> See, there's another one who didn't get it.
>
Terry Austin
Michael Ward
No red is a matter of perception. Light in that
wave-length LOOKS red to us. Therefore
this is an example. It has no meaning unless
I get a beam that light and look to see what color it is.
This is just like saying that red is the color of ripe
cherries only your example is more technical.
> angstroms, green would be light with a wavelength of 5100-5600
> angstroms.
>
> Your turn.
I'm still waiting for you to answer my question,
but I'll through you a bone. I can't
answer your question without some degree of
subjectivity.
Mike
>
> Terry Austin
>
>
Michael Ward
"William December Starr" <wds...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:9scj1t$ev0$1...@panix1.panix.com...
> In article <m3d72ue...@localhost.localdomain>,
> Tapio Erola <t...@localhost.localdomain> said:
>
> > The reason that most of the word combinations have some chill is
> > that there is only limited number of descriptive terms and ways of
> > combining them in coherent strings. And most of those names have
> > been used
> >
> > Besides 'Office for Propagation of Truth, Justice and the American
> > Way' sounds far too much like "Office for the Propagation of Virtue
> > and Prevention of Vice"
>
> "Technological Hierarchy for the Removal of Undesirables and the
> Subjugation of Humanity."
>
THRUSH?!