[Rhodes22-list] Grumpy Old Men - political for some, common sense for others

Sun Sep 7 18:07:22 EDT 2008

Robert,

You're dead on the money about energy.  There isn't a magic bullet out
there and we need some time to find the alternative solutions.  Wait
till you hear an in depth interview with Sarah on the issue - she's
done her homework.

Forgive me when I'm having too much fun.  This is the most interesting
election to watch since I've been following them circa 1968.  As far
as keeping 'eyes on the balls', I'd say one VP has more than the other
three combined.

Always a pleasure, Sir.

Brad

On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Robert Skinner <Robert at squirrelhaven.com> wrote:
> Brad, my generally learned and well-considered
> friend, I hadn't been thinking of you among
> the ranks of grumpy old men, but I guess
> there is room...
>
> Guess that takes care of civility.
>
> When it comes to "Mad As Hell And We're Not
> Taking It Anymore!", there's a lot of that
> going around on both sides of the aisle --
> entirely too much, to my way of thinking.
>
> When it comes to Palin and her kids, I suspect
> that anyone who moves into Blair house will
> have all the help they need, perhaps more than
> they want.  Frankly, I'm leaving her out of my
> thinking for now.  She is a diversion from the
> real issues that concern the selection of a
> POTUS.  Let's keep our eyes on the balls.
>
> Abusive and stupid writing is everywhere.  Some
> left wing commentators are a joke on two legs.
> But in my view, the majority of the salivating
> mad dog type are out to the right.  YMMV.
>
> Jack Kennedy: "a rising tide raises all boats"
> or in the case of rising debt, sinks all hopes.
> The "rising tide" analogy is no more valid than
> Regan's "trickle down" hypothesis.  Simple
> slogans rarely tell the whole story.
>
> Brad said/quoted, "We send our money to rogue
> nations who import terrorism back to the US
> when we're sitting on billions of our own oil."
> True as far as it goes.  Time for wind, nukes,
> clean coal, hydroelectricity, and a whole host
> of ways to produce more or use less energy.  It
> is not just about oil -- it is about change of
> methodology, expectations, and citizen (rather
> than lobby) control of government policy.
>
> And Brad, for the sake of your health, do take
> a breath now -- waiting for the press to "do
> the job" according to your wishes will be an
> exercise in futility.  Personally, I welcome
> the variations in cacophonous media as
> evidence that not all stations or papers have
> been bought by one faction or another -- or
> by foreign moguls with no stake in our future.
>
> With a little luck, we'll all walk away from
> whatever happens this November.
>
> /Robert
> -----------------------------------------------
> Brad Haslett wrote:
>> Robert,
>>
>> Nice try at civility but where have you been for the past week?
>>
>> Did anyone ask Robert F. Kennedy in 1968 when he announced that his
>> wife was pregnant with her 11th child whether he could juggle the
>> demands of being POTUS with raising his family.  Did anyone from the
>> MSM ask his campaign for DNA tests to prove the parentage of his
>> offspring?  A good number of what you call "grumpy old men" aren't
>> just grumpy, we're "Mad As Hell And We're Not Taking It Anymore!"
>>
>> Abusive writing?  Don't spend much time looking at the Daily Kos or
>> the Democratic Underground do you Robert?  Since when was Senator
>> Robert Byrd (D), former KKK operative a member of the far right wing?
>>
>> Rich v Poor spread?  Whatever happened to Jack Kennedy's "a rising
>> tide raises all boats"?
>>
>> As to international terrorism, I'd say "little Sarah Palin who knows
>> nothing about international politics" had a pretty astute observation
>> on the Charlie Rose show last November.  We send our money to rogue
>> nations who import terrorism back to the US when we're sitting on
>> billions of our own oil.
>>
>> When the press starts doing their job, I'll take a breath.
>>
>> Brad
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Robert Skinner
>> <Robert at squirrelhaven.com> wrote:
>>> Over the course of the last year or so, I have come to
>>> the conclusion that the far right wing is the holding
>>> area for the grumpy old men.
>>>
>>> This is not to say that all those who hold with what
>>> passes for conservative thinking these days are nut
>>> cases, but the far right seems to have a great
>>> attraction for some who are.  To be fair, the far
>>> left has its own population of monomaniacs.
>>>
>>> Those of us who (with some degree of calmness and
>>> humility) are working on understanding the way things
>>> work, reasoning out how they should work in the
>>> future, and figuring how to get from here to there
>>> are less vociferous, but not cowed by the torrent of
>>> abuse from the grumpy old men.
>>>
>>> It is, however, surprising that those on the far left
>>> do not use such abusive writing, bullying tactics,
>>> etc.  The far right wing has the KKK, but one must
>>> remember that the left wing, when adequately aroused,
>>> has the guillotine.
>>>
>>> Society has elastic limits in all directions.  When
>>> adequately stressed, the limit is passed, and the
>>> rules of behavior change radically and unpredictably.
>>>
>>> A case in point:
>>>
>>> One of those limits is the rich-poor spread.  Taken
>>> to extremes, as it seems to be headed these days, it
>>> creates stresses that threaten civil order.  Just as
>>> a thermal inversion (storm) occurs when air masses
>>> are unstable, social storms occur when social norms
>>> reach instability.  Confiscational taxes result.
>>>
>>> This rich-poor spread is not unique to the US.  Many
>>> would say that it exists when the US standard of
>>> living is compared with third world countries.  This
>>> fuels terrorism.
>>>
>>> And another:
>>>
>>> When the US undertakes unilateral international
>>> actions with physical force, there is a parallel
>>> between that and rogue nations that threaten their
>>> neighbors.
>>>
>>> The US is no longer the only superpower in the world,
>>> but we are acting as if we were, spending our
>>> carefully built credibility as the "good guys" in
>>> the international arena.
>>>
>>> This reduces our security, and encourages terrorism.
>>>
>>> Wrap-up:
>>>
>>> There are many such stresses that exist (and always
>>> have) in societies.  How we handle ourselves in
>>> dealing with them is history in action.  And history
>>> rarely, if ever, produces absolute results.  It's a
>>> dirty business, with imperfect results.
>>>
>>> We do what we can with what we have.  Bombast is a
>>> waste of breath (or electrons).
>>>
>>> /Robert
>>> ----------------------------------------------------
>>> Ben Cittadino wrote:
>>>> My Dear Culture Warriors;
>>>>
>>>> So....are we having fun yet?
>>>>
>>>> First, I'd like to thank Richard and Slim for stepping up to join the "Assault on the Citadel".
>>>> The bullets don't sting as much when the adversary's fire is spread out among more than one target.
>>>> In the words first uttered by Gen. "Vinegar Joe" Stillwell, "illegitimi non carborundum".
>>>>
>>>> As for Tootle, Brad, and Herb, you guys crack me up.  I posted about Obama only because I saw Tootle's post that
>>>> suggested anybody supporting Obama was either a marxist, or a farm animal.  What did he expect when he said that?
>>>> Herb, where was your outrage that Tootle would refer to some of his fellow "Rhodies" in such derogatry terms? Supporting Obama or McCain
>>>> may turn out to be right or wrong, but if we debate policy and don't engage in mere name-calling this "sailor's bar"  could be an interesting place.
>>>>
>>>> Richard's "geezer" remarks are defensible on several grounds. First, he was provoked. Second, he was defending ME.
>>>> Third, it was funny. Calling someone a "marxist" as Tootle did is several magnitudes worse than gentle kidding of the
>>>> "old fart" kind. Surely you see the difference.
>>>>
>>>> The positions I tried to lay out as reasons some people support Obama were intended as an outline of ideology (as Slim noted),
>>>> not an argument supporting any position.  For example, Herb, you are pro-life and will probably vote for McCain/Palin in part for that reason.
>>>> I am pro-choice, pro-embryonic stem cell research and so I will support Obama/Biden in part for that reason.  It is not hyperbole to  point out
>>>> the policy differences that explain my choice.  What I know for sure is that marxism and "sheepiness" have nothing to do with it. I have thought about all of my positions on the issues I mentioned and am completely prepared to explain and justify them.  In Brad's oft' repeated mantra I know I have "done my homework".
>>>>
>>>> Enough for today. The games will be on soon.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers!
>>>>
>>>> Ben C. , s/v Susan Kay, Highlands, NJ
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>