Apologies to the US peeps
› Forums › Cult Sci Fi Series › Lexx › Apologies to the US peeps
- This topic has 96 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 23 years, 6 months ago by
Anonymous.
-
AuthorPosts
-
4th August 2001 at 10:50 pm #48126
Anonymous
GuestWhy not Gore? Because of a little thing Mrs. Gore created so long ago: The PMRC (Parents Music Resource Center) What’s that? It’s a “watchdog” group she created to censor the music industry. You can thank god they didn’t get as much of their agenda done as they wanted, and you can thank Tipper for those annoying warning stickers. Was this the kind of people I wanted in the White House? NOPE. Lord only knows what other forms of censorship she would have created whilst in the background.
That doesn’t bear thinking about if she had got her way, I mean rap would be gone and any other type of music that utters a single profanity.
While I don’t agree with some types of music (like Marilyn Manson), music is about self expression and should not be censored unless it really does go too far.
Yuk, imagine if the only bands we’re left with after her censorship are the manufactured boy bands like Westlife or Boyzone, that would be a sorry state of affairs.
But definitely ban Indie, it’s so god damn depressing.
I don’t know if you’ve heard of him, but we had this spoof rap guy called Ali G, he’s basically a white bloke pretending to be black, only he doesn’t understand a word of what they are saying.
God knows what Gore’s wife would have made of him!!!
Squishy——————
Squishy4th August 2001 at 11:06 pm #48127Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Squish:
[b]While I don’t agree with some types of music (like Marilyn Manson), music is about self expression and should not be censored unless it really does go too far.[/b]
I don’t think that it’s possible for music *to* go too far. “Too far” is past a point that is determined personally and subjectively, and to expect any artist to not venture beyond this subjective personal point is to inhibit their means of self-expression. Whether or not the music in question is promoted or distributed is a corporate decision made by record labels, but it is not one that should be made by any official agency of the government.
…And what about Marilyn Manson don’t you agree with? (Just curious)–Aleck
4th August 2001 at 11:50 pm #48128Anonymous
GuestWhat I mean by too far is using music to promote being a padeophile or something of a similar nature, can’t say whether that will ever happen, but sometimes it can be a bit touch and go in an effort to be outrageous.
I think we are open-minded enough to accept swearing and sometimes racial overtones in music, subtle as it sometimes may be, but there our things that aren’t neccessary to make music.
I think Marilyn Manson is just weird, although that’s not enough reason to say he’s a bad songwriter. But I think most people like him coz he dares to be different,
personally I don’t like his music or his ability at being a poser…but that’s down to my personal tastes, and if other’s like him for whatever reason then I accept that.
Squishy——————
Squishy6th August 2001 at 3:13 am #48129trillian
ParticipantBacking up to Clinton as president. Like I mentioned before, I’m hard pressed to think what policies he passed that had a positive effect on the well being of the American people. Everyone said what a great job he did…but what, EXACTLY did he do? I really need a reminder on that.
——————
“…we will be restoring normality just as soon as we are sure what normal is anyway.”6th August 2001 at 3:36 am #48130Anonymous
Guest[QUOTE]Originally posted by trillian:
[B]Backing up to Clinton as president. Like I mentioned before, I’m hard pressed to think what policies he passed that had a positive effect on the well being of the American people. Everyone said what a great job he did…but what, EXACTLY did he do? I really need a reminder on that.Well I couldn’t say with any degree of certainty, as I don’t live there, only that the impression that the people in the U.K got was that the country was prospering and unemployment was at it’s lowest during his period in office.
Other than that, I wouldn’t know, unfortunately the impression we are getting of Bush isn’t so favourable, he is being put across in topical debate’s and comedy news shows as a very dangerous individual, and a bit stupid to boot.
I guess it’s just what the media want us to perceive him as, personally, I think it’s a bit early to judge the guy.
Squishy——————
Squishy6th August 2001 at 6:04 am #48131trillian
Participant
quote:
Originally posted by Squish:
[b][QUOTE]
Well I couldn’t say with any degree of certainty, as I don’t live there, only that the impression that the people in the U.K got was that the country was prospering and unemployment was at it’s lowest during his period in office….(snip)
Squishy[/b]
Those are the numbers that I was talking about earlier. Employed…that includes the folks working two or more jobs to make ends meet. Or the folks who are working one job because they don’t want their kids to consider them strangers, but still have to get food stamps to get enough food. Yes, the numbers looked good, but the numbers sources tended to be from a liberalist press that liked Clinton. Now a lot of people are in credit card hell because they were being told that everything was just peachy, things are looking up, spend, spend, spend….and they did. Which of course made the economy look good, consumer spending was up! But, those credit cards have to be paid off sometime…I’m wondering when that will be.
6th August 2001 at 7:10 am #48132Anonymous
Guest[QUOTE]Originally posted by trillian:
[B] Those are the numbers that I was talking about earlier. Employed…that includes the folks working two or more jobs to make ends meet. Or the folks who are working one job because they don’t want their kids to consider them strangers, but still have to get food stamps to get enough food. Yes, the numbers looked good, but the numbers sources tended to be from a liberalist press that liked Clinton. Now a lot of people are in credit card hell because they were being told that everything was just peachy, things are looking up, spend, spend, spend….and they did. Which of course made the economy look good, consumer spending was up! But, those credit cards have to be paid off sometime…I’m wondering when that will be.I’m really going back and forth with this, now I feel sorry for Bush, sounds like he’s having to deal with the aftermath of the Clinton era.
Personally, I wouldn’t be encouraged to whip out the credit card just because somebody told me that I wouldn’t suffer for it.
I don’t know why, and I feel I’m a fairly good judge of character, but I’m still very wary of Bush, he doesn’t fill me with confidence.
I don’t say that because he’s your President, but because of his ability on the world stage, he’s already said that he will do away with the treaty preventing the building of the Star Wars project, angering the Russians and Chinese in the process.
Squishy——————
Squishy6th August 2001 at 11:18 am #48133Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by trillian:
[b]Yes, the numbers looked good, but the numbers sources tended to be from a liberalist press that liked Clinton. [/b]
The claims of a “liberal bias” to the media is, for the most part, baseless. Of course, to any conservative, a balanced news source is going to look as if it has a liberal bias because he or she is going to be angered by about 1/2 of what he or she sees, and it’s easy to note what provokes you. If the media is so liberal, why was Clinton’s first term so roundly attacked? Why was the Lewinsky affair so heavily covered when the majority of the public did not care one whit about it? Where were those liberal voices when Bush’s first months in tenure were greeted with glowing reports (and don’t use op-ed pieces as a factor in weighing the balance, as they are opinion pieces and are, by nature, not supposed to be balanced), while Clinton was dogged after he had left the office? I mean, the majority of newspaper publishers are *Republicans,* for crying out loud.
quote[quote][b]Now a lot of people are in credit card hell because they were being told that everything was just peachy, things are looking up, spend, spend, spend….and they did. Which of course made the economy look good, consumer spending was up! But, those credit cards have to be paid off sometime…I’m wondering when that will be.[/b][/quote]
People are told *every day* to spend, spend, spend. I refuse to believe that the economy took an upturn simply because a lot of people went into credit card debt. That just doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. And if people *did* go into debt because they were told to spend, then they *deserve* to be in debt. The failure of some people to act responsibly should not be blamed on the government. Consumer spending was up, chiefly, because people were making more money. Unemployment went down, while the number of jobs went up. It’s not a matter of “cooking the books.” Most conservative pundits won’t even attempt to argue with that, and instead try to pass that off to actions taken by Bush Sr. that took years to come to fruition. The number of people on welfare also went down significantly (something else that conservatives try to pin on Bush Sr.).
Now, I’m not saying that things were all rosy under Clinton’s administration. There were certain policies made that I personally did not agree with. For instance, he stepped up the drug war, which is a personal pet peeve of mine (legislating morality and all that, which is a particularly conservative pastime), he kowtowed to the religious right and the arch-conservatives by getting rid of Jocelyn Elders as Surgeon General (simply because she said that sexual education should make reference to masturbation, which was blown out of proportion in the so-called liberal media to appear that she was calling for instruction in how to masturbate) and he backed down on the issue of gays in the military (though he did make it illegal to *ask* if someone was gay, which is a *small* step forward).But I’d take all that in an *instant* over what we’ve got right now. Cutting off funding to foreign medical centers that discuss abortion as an option (which was “spun” by the White House to appear that Bush was cutting US funding of abortions themselves, which was a flat-out lie because the US didn’t fund abortions to *begin with*), nominating a religious zealot as Attorney General, placing the FCC in the hands of the Sec. of Defense’s son (whose first action was to fine a radio station for playing a CLEAN version of a song because of “context”), kissing the collective ass of China after holding US pilots hostage (I can only imagine the thrashing the liberal media would have given Clinton for an apology as toadying as Bush’s), giving wildlife preserves to oil companies, offering government funds to religious organizations (never mind the separation of Church and State issues that this violates)…Is it any wonder that Bush *lost* the popular vote?
Thank goodness it’s only a little over 3 years.
–Aleck
6th August 2001 at 12:11 pm #48134Anonymous
GuestDon’t feel sorry for Bush, Squish.
He has his daddys old friends to help him screw things up.6th August 2001 at 10:33 pm #48135Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Squish:
[b]What I mean by too far is using music to promote being a padeophile or something of a similar nature, can’t say whether that will ever happen, but sometimes it can be a bit touch and go in an effort to be outrageous.
I think we are open-minded enough to accept swearing and sometimes racial overtones in music, subtle as it sometimes may be, but there our things that aren’t neccessary to make music.[/b]
But, as I’ve said, that’s all subjective and personal. No governmental agency should be allowed to tell me or anyone else what can and cannot be said, or what can and cannot be expressed in music. Also, it’s not the right of any government to say what is and isn’t safe for me to listen to or see. Which goes back to my oft-repeated point that as much as I love Great Britain and have loved visiting it, I could never live in a place that would make it illegal for me to watch the uncut [i]Cannibal Holocaust[/i].
–Aleck
7th August 2001 at 12:14 am #48136Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Hypatia:
[b]Don’t feel sorry for Bush, Squish.
He has his daddys old friends to help him screw things up. [/b]
I don’t actually know if I feel genuinely sorry for Bush, I don’t think he’s been given too much of a chance since taking office…so I’ll spare him my pity until he really makes a mess of things.
For the moment, I would have to say as a President, Clinton still has the edge, as human beings, well I think we’ve established that they are both pretty poor in this area.
Squishy——————
Squishy7th August 2001 at 12:29 am #48137Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
[b] But, as I’ve said, that’s all subjective and personal. No governmental agency should be allowed to tell me or anyone else what can and cannot be said, or what can and cannot be expressed in music. Also, it’s not the right of any government to say what is and isn’t safe for me to listen to or see. Which goes back to my oft-repeated point that as much as I love Great Britain and have loved visiting it, I could never live in a place that would make it illegal for me to watch the uncut [i]Cannibal Holocaust[/i].–Aleck[/b]
Aleck, I completely agree with you on people being allowed to say whatever they choose, but would you buy a record that promoted the exploitation of children?, for that matter would anyone. And the reason you wouldn’t buy is because of what it is, and how would you feel if the makers of the record were allowed to walk away without threat of the law.
O.K so these people may not of actually been responsible for acts of exploitation of children, but they are sending a clear message to those who think about it or do it, to carry on, because they may feel that the lyrics in the song and the fact that the law has not punished the songwriter, makes the whole thing acceptable.
As for the laws governing censorship in this country are concerned, they are a joke, with these stringent and ridiculous laws we fall behind the rest of the world, and just leaves some with the impression that we are obnoxious prudes.
I mean Evil dead was censored at one point, why, you look at it now and laugh, they still are censoring the Zev shower scene as well, what on earth for?
This country has had it’s head stuck up it’s backside for far too long, and it’s mainly the fault of the older generation trying to hold on to values that are just simply archaic in this day and age, trouble is the idiots at the BBC and the ITC listen to them more than any other generation.
Squshy——————
Squishy7th August 2001 at 12:47 am #48138trillian
Participant[QUOTE]Originally posted by Aleck:
People are told *every day* to spend, spend, spend. I refuse to believe that the economy took an upturn simply because a lot of people went into credit card debt. That just doesn’t make any sense whatsoever…..*and did you hear that people are drowning an average of $10,000 in debt? I don’t think that happened since January. When did it happen? Maybe when they were being told all is peachy, jobs are going up, hey, I bet there’s gonna be a worker shortage! Baby, your guaranteed a job at this company FOREVER! Go ahead and buy a new ‘fridge, ‘cuz it’s all OK.*
And if people *did* go into debt because they were told to spend, then they *deserve* to be in debt. The failure of some people to act responsibly should not be blamed on the government.
*tehe, why not? Everything else is* Consumer spending was up, chiefly, because people were making more money.
*because the companies thought everything was peachy because Govt. projections said it was, interest rates kept low. Let’s go ahead and give them a raise, we’ll make it up in five years with profit, because everyone’s spending, and we’ll keep our employees happy. Do you see the viscious circle this creates? It’s all fed on one another, until something would go boom, like getting a President that no one has confidence in*
Unemployment went down, while the number of jobs went up.
*numbers, where are the numbers??? Tell me so I can go look at them and see what the source for these numbers are and the information so I can make an educated opinion about them.*
It’s not a matter of “cooking the books.” *Yes it is*
Most conservative pundits won’t even attempt to argue with that, and instead try to pass that off to actions taken by Bush Sr. that took years to come to fruition.
*nope, most Republicans will tell you that it is Reagan’s policies that took years to come to fruition. You do realize that Clinton had the highest tax raises in history? Even Kennedy, a Democrat, knew that the lower the taxes, the more pay people could take home, the more cash they had to spend on clothes, food, cars and housing, thus stimulating an economy. *
The number of people on welfare also went down significantly
*because people were kicked off of welfare if they couldn’t find a job, so either work a minimum wage job that strapped you, because now you are paying for a sitter and gas and insurance and a car, just so you can work, so you can keep food stamps to feed your kids, who you may not see you much anymore, but by golly, ain’t Clinton great? He’s got everyone working jobs…but wait, now you can’t get medicare because you have a job…and darn…Johnny broke his leg because the babysitter who has far too many kids to watch, but she was the only one who could take him, wasn’t watching him as he jumped off the porch… and you have no insurance…so you have to pay off the hospital…but …I think we can all see where this is going. Numbers can and are manipulated, constantly*
(something else that conservatives try to pin on Bush Sr.).
Now, I’m not saying that things were all rosy under Clinton’s administration. There were certain policies made that I personally did not agree with. For instance, he stepped up the drug war, which is a personal pet peeve of mine (legislating morality and all that, which is a particularly conservative pastime), he kowtowed to the religious right and the arch-conservatives by getting rid of Jocelyn Elders as Surgeon General (simply because she said that sexual education should make reference to masturbation, which was blown out of proportion in the so-called liberal media to appear that she was calling for instruction in how to masturbate) and he backed down on the issue of gays in the military (though he did make it illegal to *ask* if someone was gay, which is a *small* step forward).*I’m still waiting for the policies he instituted that helped. I haven’t seen a single example yet, a name of a bill… something. I’m seeing a lot of negatives about both Prez’s but I’m still looking for direct examples, names, dates so I can know the positive impact that Clinton had. Positive impact Bush had?…I don’t know, it’s still early…you know, back to the numbers thing…I think Bush should have waited to give money back. Just to make sure everything jived up and we aren’t getting screwed by it*
But I’d take all that in an *instant* over what we’ve got right now. Cutting off funding to foreign medical centers that discuss abortion as an option (which was “spun” by the White House to appear that Bush was cutting US funding of abortions themselves, which was a flat-out lie because the US didn’t fund abortions to *begin with*)
*this I will not get into, I REFUSE to discuss abortion on a list, it’s not discussed in my house because this house has agreed to disagree on it. It’s far more complicated than the black and white issue everyone wants to make it out as*
nominating a religious zealot as Attorney General,
*who says he’s a religious zealot? Does he shave his head and sell flowers at the airport? Just wondering, becuase this is the first time I’ve seen this issue*
placing the FCC in the hands of the Sec. of Defense’s son (whose first action was to fine a radio station for playing a CLEAN version of a song because of “context”), kissing the collective ass of China after holding US pilots hostage *(I can only imagine the thrashing the liberal media would have given Clinton for an apology as toadying as Bush’s)
*they would have said, Isn’t Clinton a magnificent statesman? See what he could accomplish?? No one died. He’s sooo brilliant, wow, what a amazingly froody guy. This doesn’t help with any examples of what Clinton directly instilled for laws, bills, policies…I’m waiting*
, giving wildlife preserves to oil companies, offering government funds to religious organizations
*as long as the organization doesn’t try to convert or discuss religious philosophy, some of those churches need that funding. Would you deny the Luthern Family Services, a therapy place, funding? How callous is that? What about Good Samaritan Systems, a hospital network? Would they be covered under that also? Some of these services dont exist publically, what would you suggest the homeless or sick do?*
(never mind the separation of Church and State issues that this violates)
*I’m not really sure if it does violate it. Has this gone to the courts yet? Has there been a ruling on it? I’m missing cable something awful, no 24 hour news, so I don’t know what is going on anymore. The half hour on ABC, CBS, or NBC just doesn’t cover anything in detail* …Is it any wonder that Bush *lost* the popular vote?
*What? Bush lost the popular vote? hrmm…that darn rascally electoral college, not paying attention to the media’s wants.
Well, on the serious side, I think the govt. should cut back on spending and I think maybe everyone agrees they should. The problem is where do they cut back? And that’s when the greed and pork start coming in, everyone wants to protect their state. And in Protecting their state, they make a deal with Prince.
I think I might listen to Granny more in the future. [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img] *
——————
“…we will be restoring normality just as soon as we are sure what normal is anyway.”7th August 2001 at 1:10 am #48139Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Squish:
[b] Aleck, I completely agree with you on people being allowed to say whatever they choose, but would you buy a record that promoted the exploitation of children?, for that matter would anyone. And the reason you wouldn’t buy is because of what it is, and how would you feel if the makers of the record were allowed to walk away without threat of the law.
O.K so these people may not of actually been responsible for acts of exploitation of children, but they are sending a clear message to those who think about it or do it, to carry on, because they may feel that the lyrics in the song and the fact that the law has not punished the songwriter, makes the whole thing acceptable.[/b]
For one thing, how I would feel about the hypothetical record is a moot point. Whether or not I would buy it is not a matter that warrants discussion. The question is, should a record like that be prohibited by law? And the answer is a resounding “no.” Whether or not a song, record, film or book influences a person to act in a certain manner says more about the person in question than the work. There are people out there who will find *any* justification for their actions in whatever media they look at, from the Bible to the [i]Anarchist’s Cookbook[/i], just as there are people out there who will do whatever it is they do with or without the help of any outside media influence. On top of that, someone who writes a song that “promotes the exploitation of children” may have had other motives in mind, and the song may be misinterpreted by Those In Charge. For instance, Steely Dan’s latest grammy-winning album contained a song titled “Cousin Dupree” which was about incest and paedophiliac yearnings. Now, the song is definitely *not* supposed to be taken seriously or at face value, but I could see how this could fall outside the boundaries of “good taste,” and find itself censored for going “too far.” On the other extreme, G.G. Allin, the late punk rock anti-star, devoted many recordings to completely unsavory topics, and participated in many unsavory acts. Should some of the things he did cause his arrest? Yes, and they did. Should what he sang about cause arrest? No, because there is no clear evidence that they inspired anyone else to do *anything*. In fact, some could find catharsis from hearing these things. Some have claimed that the film [i]Natural Born Killers[/i] has inspired “copycat” crimes. I contend that these troubled people were on the breaking point and would have found *any* excuse to act out, and fingers were pointed irresponsibly to a film instead of the people responsible. Last example. 2 kids shot up their high school in Columbine, and the media, authorities, and the public pointed their fingers at the music, bands, and movies they enjoyed (and, in the case of Marilyn Manson, a band that they didn’t even *like*). Of course, no one pointed their fingers at the parents who had no idea what their children were like, the school authorities that failed to recognize 2 kids in trouble, or the students that taunted these kids to the breaking point. In all of these cases, we have artists making controversial points or statements, and the potential for their expression to be silenced because of personal interpretation of their meaning, the fact that they may fall outside of the subjective limits of good taste and the potential for idiotic dunderheads to do whatever they think that they’re being told.
And if we start with these, or a recording that promotes the exploitation of children, where do we stop? Where does the limit fall? What if the record advocates anti-government actions? What if the record advocates drug use? Promiscuous sex? Satanism? Where does the line get drawn, and more importantly, who draws the line?
–Aleck
7th August 2001 at 1:21 am #48140Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
[b] I could never live in a place that would make it illegal for me to watch the uncut [i]Cannibal Holocaust[/i].
–Aleck[/b]
mmmm – sounds good Aleck. Does Acorn have that one?
——————
– Aurora7th August 2001 at 1:56 am #48141Anonymous
GuestOkay, I don’t have specific names and numbers handy here at work, so I won’t address these points at this given time, but here’s the response to what I can respond *to* right now.
quote:
Originally posted by trillian:
[b]*and did you hear that people are drowning an average of $10,000 in debt? I don’t think that happened since January. When did it happen? Maybe when they were being told all is peachy, jobs are going up, hey, I bet there’s gonna be a worker shortage! Baby, your guaranteed a job at this company FOREVER! Go ahead and buy a new ‘fridge, ‘cuz it’s all OK.*[/b]
And where does the $10,000 figure come from? Whose statistics? How does that compare to the figures (adjusted with inflation) from the administrations of Reagan and Bush Sr.? Where is the frame of reference?
quote[quote][b]*because the companies thought everything was peachy because Govt. projections said it was, interest rates kept low. Let’s go ahead and give them a raise, we’ll make it up in five years with profit, because everyone’s spending, and we’ll keep our employees happy. Do you see the viscious circle this creates? It’s all fed on one another, until something would go boom, like getting a President that no one has confidence in*[/b][/quote]
So, the economy was bad because people made more money, because their companies gave them raises, because spending was up, which meant profits were up, which meant that government projections were good (based on the evidence), which meant that interest rates were down, which meant that the economy was good? In short, the economy sucked because it was good? Or, at least, was good until Bush II came along and told everyone that a slowdown in growth meant that we were all *dooooooomed*?
quote[quote][b]*nope, most Republicans will tell you that it is Reagan’s policies that took years to come to fruition. [/b][/quote]
Either way, most Republican pundits will admit that the economy was booming, but will try and place the credit on a previous Republican administration. Either way, Democrats and Republicans agree that the economy was doing extremely well during Clinton’s administration, but disagree on where to place the credit.
quote[quote][b]*this I will not get into, I REFUSE to discuss abortion on a list, it’s not discussed in my house because this house has agreed to disagree on it. It’s far more complicated than the black and white issue everyone wants to make it out as*[/b][/quote]
I am not saying that abortion is either right or wrong. I’m not making that arguement at all. I’m talking about telling overseas medical facilities that they cannot discuss a legal medical procedure, else they lose funding. Whether you think that abortion is right or wrong, the procedure is legal in those countries where it was being discussed, and we’re talking about restricting funds because of medical advice based on a legal medical procedure. The morality of the practice is not being called into question, as the practice isn’t being funded. We’re talking about a restriction on speech, not an ethical question about abortion.
quote[quote][b]*who says he’s a religious zealot? Does he shave his head and sell flowers at the airport? Just wondering, becuase this is the first time I’ve seen this issue*[/b][/quote]
Well, he doesn’t sell flowers at airports, but he was more than willing to speak at (and implicitly support) Bob Jones University, which has a conservative Christian agenda just to the right of Hitler, he is a devoted follower of a faith that does not allow cursing, smoking, drinking or *gulp* [i]dancing[/i], he has consistently used his faith’s opposition to homosexuality as a rule in his political work (voting against hate-crime bills twice, in 1999 and 2000, opposing nominations based on sexual orientation, etc.)…I could go on.
quote[quote][b]*What? Bush lost the popular vote? hrmm…that darn rascally electoral college, not paying attention to the media’s wants.[/b][/quote]
Oh, stop playing that tired “liberal media” card. It has no basis in this. The fact is that Bush received *fewer votes* than Gore. Bush LOST the popular vote. Bush is President because of the electoral college *alone*. Unless you count the Supreme Court (oh, and since you’re adamantly in favor of honesty in politicians, what are we to make of the Bush campaign’s statements of “we are not taking this to the courts,” but when recounts began to make it look like Gore was coming in ahead, they were the first ones at the courthouse doors?)
–Aleck
7th August 2001 at 4:29 am #48142trillian
Participant
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
[b]Okay, I don’t have specific names and numbers handy here at work, so I won’t address these points at this given time, but here’s the response to what I can respond *to* right now….–Aleck[/b]
And this is why Granny said don’t discuss these, because we can come up with point and counter point into infinity. Yes, I did originally respond, I spent a lot of time looking around the net. Found a page called The Green Papers that actually *gasp* had all the numbers from the past election, including write in candidates for all the states. *kewl* Found out that Texas voted Republican, 59.3%. But because of a slow computer, I closed the window and lost everything I had typed. [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/frown.gif[/img]
Now, like I said, I refuse to talk about abortion in any manner. period.
AHA! I found some things that give more specifics that Clinton did to improve the state of being! Here: [url=http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/16/latimes.legacy/index.html]click here to go to site[/url]
I think this is a good article, it discusses over many of the subjects we’ve covered. So Johnny’s broken leg was taken care of! whew, how quickly times can change.
They talk about the Community Re-investment act, but who initiated that in the first place? They don’t really say in this article. Looking it up…Ah, was in 1977, re-regulated in 1995, so although Clinton didn’t originally legislate the concept, he did stiffen it up to be more effective.The reason why I “hid behind the liberal media card” is because I’ve seen it up close and personal. I know how stories can get slashed from the way they were written, or how editors will fight to get what they want in, even if it wasn’t the reporters intention. It’s an ugly beast and very frustrating.
As to the credit card numbers, I heard it on the ‘ol boob tube. I thought they said the numbers were from ’96-’99 and the figures were provided by the credit card companies.
——————
“…we will be restoring normality just as soon as we are sure what normal is anyway.”[This message has been edited by SadGeezer (edited August 15, 2001).]
7th August 2001 at 5:05 am #48143Anonymous
GuestIf I may..
Since the Bush administration took over and since leaving my tech support job in April, in favor of keeping my rapidly diminishing sanity…
I have not been able to get a job anywhere that I have looked. LOOKED.. not APPLIED.. and why is that?
Well, EVERYONE.. EVERYPLACE I went to.. NO ONE was taking applications. Why you may ask? Everyone was downsizing. They were laying off people so therefore.. they were not doing any hiring.
AL-****ing-SO..
The place I quit, which is where a friend of mine still worX.. said that there had been lots of layoffs. Then a few weeX later he was telling me that they were getting rid of the overnite shift altogether.. (so if you use @home.. call during normal business hours from now on [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img] ) which meant even more layoffs.
Another friend of mine worX for an ad agency in Los Colinas. A few months ago they did some major down-sizing. I visited him recently. Immagine a 5 or 6 story building with all the floors Xposed from the main lobby in which you can see every floor, almost totally empty. Anyone ever see Tron? Immagine how empty that was but with several visible layers. I asked my friend where all the employees were. He told me that everyone that still worked there was there that day at work.
Well, kiddies I’ll be back later.. because..
JUST GOT MY LEXX SEASON 2 VOL.3!!!!!
[img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img]——————
“The best defense is a strong offense.. and I intend to start offending right now.”
-James T. Kirk7th August 2001 at 5:18 am #48144Anonymous
GuestIts like Yoda said “Try not, there is no try”
I have learned that lesson the hard way. At least when it comes to me it seems like I just have to trust that everything will work out. I figure with in my next job or two I should have an office of my own. Don’t ask me how I know that will happen because if I ask my self that and try to make it happen I can assure you will not happen. I figure some galactic polititian like George W must have created a faith based life plan for people like me.-SM
——————
“Your wrong this is one hell of a planet!”
-ATF agent in “Texx Lexx”7th August 2001 at 6:38 am #48145Anonymous
GuestSlop.. nothing have you learned?
The quote is “Try not. Do or do not. There is no try.” [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/tongue.gif[/img]
love the signature btw [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img]
——————
“The best defense is a strong offense.. and I intend to start offending right now.”
-James T. Kirk7th August 2001 at 6:42 am #48146Anonymous
GuestCor Blimey, Aleck, that was some post, and I don’t think my poor little squish brain has the capacity to respond to it.
I will say that there’s to sides to a coin, and that your views are completely correct, and I acknowledge the points you put across.
Anyway, I’m too upset at the moment to even write anything as long as your post…I love two Sci-fi programmes with a passion, Lexx obviously, and the other is Voyager.
And darn it, I’ve just watched the last episode, and it feels like a friend has gone and I feel empty. It’s the same way I felt at the end of TNG (didn’t feel that way about the useless DS9), I’m really gonna miss Seven and the rest of the crew, and now there is nothing to fill the void…no Lexx at the moment to help with my grief.
So i’m off to wallow in my grief, and pray that I see the crew in Star Trek movie in the future.
At the end of it, they showed a small promo of Enterprise, and I read up on it, pre-Kirk apparently, can’t say I like the idea…but I’ll give it a chance, at least they’ve got a good captain (Scott Bakula).
Bye for now (sob,sob).
Squishy——————
Squishy7th August 2001 at 9:36 am #48147Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by trillian:
[b]Now, like I said, I refuse to talk about abortion in any manner. period.[/b]
Again, I am not talking about abortion. I’m talking about *people talking about* abortion. I’m talking about a freedom of speech issue, and the US government penalizing people for exercising that freedom simply because the White House is attempting to reassure the religious right.
quote:
[b]AHA! I found some things that give more specifics that Clinton did to improve the state of being! Here: [url=http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/stories/01/16/latimes.legacy/index.html]click here to go to site[/url]
I think this is a good article, it discusses over many of the subjects we’ve covered. So Johnny’s broken leg was taken care of! whew, how quickly times can change.
They talk about the Community Re-investment act, but who initiated that in the first place? They don’t really say in this article. Looking it up…Ah, was in 1977, re-regulated in 1995, so although Clinton didn’t originally legislate the concept, he did stiffen it up to be more effective.[/b]
I have no idea if you’re being sarcastic or not. If so, then you’re disproving your initial point that Clinton did nothing. If not, then at least you’re approaching this with an open mind, and not taking the route taken by so many who completely write off the entire administration as worthless. I was responding to my earlier post before I left work, and didn’t have time to finish before I had to run catch the bus, but these were among the specifics of the Clinton administration I was going to mention (and I haven’t read the article you posted as of yet)…
(1) Clinton signed into law the Family and Medical Leave Act, which guraranteed that people who had to leave work due to births or medical emergencies would have either the same job or a comparable one at the same pay waiting for them for up to 12 weeks.
(2) Clinton expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit, providing relief to households or individuals making less than $27,000 a year.
(3) Clinton increased funding for Head Start by over $760 million.
(4) Clinton passed the Student Loan Reform Act, which not only lowered interest rates on federally-funded student loans (and made them available directly from the federal government instead of through a bank), but allowed for higher flexibility in repaying them.
(5) Clinton established AmeriCorps, which offered such services as tutoring students and immunizing children, and which allowed members to earn money that would go towards college tuition or job training.
(6) Clinton signed into law the Brady Bill, which requires a 5-day waiting period on purchasing firearms.
(7) Clinton ordered the Justice Department to conduct a crackdown on parents who have refused to financially support their own children.
(8) Clinton increased federal funding for breast cancer research by 65 percent.
(9) Clinton’s 1993 Economic Plan *did* increase taxes (though offered an expanded Earned Income Tax Credit to 15 million low-income households), though primarily affected the wealthiest 1.2 percent of taxpayers, and enforced caps on domestic spending. Which led to a budgetary surplus that arrived *4 years* ahead of schedule, and was *twice as large* as originally estimated. On top of that, the economy was booming, income had increased, and consumer spending was up (all of this *with* tax increases, mind you).Of course, all of these figures will probably be picked apart and claimed that they’re all part of the “liberal agenda” to whitewash Clinton’s presidency (though I have yet to see a decent response to the question of why Bush’s first months in office were greeted with incredible amounts of ass-kissing from the press).
quote[quote][b]The reason why I “hid behind the liberal media card” is because I’ve seen it up close and personal. [/b][/quote]
Yeah, well, I was specifically referring to your implication that the reports that Bush lost the popular vote was part of some Liberal Media Conspiracy. The official numbers had Bush trailing Gore by over 1/2 million votes. Again, as for the “liberal media” claims, I still contend that it does not exist (ever tracked down who actually *owns* the media? It’s interesting). As I said, any conservative is going to make note of what he or she doesn’t agree with, and any balanced report is guaranteed to upset them at least half the time.
–Aleck
[This message has been edited by SadGeezer (edited August 15, 2001).]
7th August 2001 at 10:52 am #48148Anonymous
GuestDear Trish and Aleck,
Heh, maybe we should call it a day on this thread, before it turns into a flaming war.
I think it’s safe to say that you both have differences, and that you may not see each other’s point of view.
Besides, the original observations were just friendly ones, and I was just interested on how things were going over there, I think I’ve got the picture now, so let’s settle with both administration’s being pretty shabby and leave it and that.
Let’s get back to the reason we are all here…Lexx, I came to this group because you are all so friendly, let’s keep it that way!!!
Squishy——————
Squishy7th August 2001 at 11:13 am #48149Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Squish:
[b]Dear Trish and Aleck[/b]
It’s TRILLIAN! Of course, that’s probably short for Tricia MacMillan, but still…
[img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img]
I’m not flaming anyone. Trillian just posted some defense of Bush, I countered, and it came down to the two of us locked in a head-to-head struggle where only ONE CAN SURVIVE…Sorry, the post turned into a trailer for a 1970’s Kung-Fu Flick there for a second…where was I? Oh, anyway, I, while not being a huge fan of Clinton’s (any more than I can say that I’m a fan of *any* politician), have to say that I liked him better than I’m liking the guy currently squatting in the White House. I mean, there were actions taken in Clinton’s presidency that I directly felt the benefit of, and there are actions being taken in Bush’s admin that make me uncomfortable as *hell*.
–Aleck
7th August 2001 at 11:25 am #48150trillian
Participant
quote:
Originally posted by Squish:
[b]Dear Trish and Aleck,
Heh, maybe we should call it a day on this thread, before it turns into a flaming war.
I think it’s safe to say that you both have differences, and that you may not see each other’s point of view.
Besides, the original observations were just friendly ones, and I was just interested on how things were going over there, I think I’ve got the picture now, so let’s settle with both administration’s being pretty shabby and leave it and that.
Let’s get back to the reason we are all here…Lexx, I came to this group because you are all so friendly, let’s keep it that way!!!
Squishy[/b]
Sweetie, that’s fine by me.
I wasn’t being sarcastic, Aleck, I know it can be hard to tell when reading the written word. I honestly, honestly was having a hard time to remember what he did, which is why I was honestly asking specifics. My significant other has been laid of from his job in 2000, us having no scent of lay offs pending. So including motherhood and stress, this old brain is like a seive, too much to remember. I’m gonna stop here, because like I said, we can counter point for infinity and I don’t want to start more, because two things that are personal to everybody are their politics and religion.
*holds out hand for a great debate*
——————
“…we will be restoring normality just as soon as we are sure what normal is anyway.”7th August 2001 at 11:53 am #48151Anonymous
GuestSorry about the Trish thing Trillian, it’s 6:30 in the a.m in the UK, and my brain is fried.
And my dear Aleck, I didn’t say you were flaming anyone, I just commented on how it might turn out that way.
Right that’s enough from me, I’m off to bed (that’s if my fried brain can remember where it is!!!).
Goodnight, my American friends…live long and prosper.
Squishy——————
Squishy7th August 2001 at 1:11 pm #48152Anonymous
GuestHey I’m to lazy to read though all three pages of this post so can some one give me the gist of what the argument between Aleck and Trill is?
-SM
——————
“Your wrong this is one hell of a planet!”
-ATF agent in “Texx Lexx”7th August 2001 at 6:29 pm #48153Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Slopmaster:
[b]Hey I’m to lazy to read though all three pages of this post so can some one give me the gist of what the argument between Aleck and Trill is?[/b]
Who was better: Micky Dolenz or Davy Jones? Then we compromised and said that it was Michael Nesmith.
–Aleck
7th August 2001 at 6:41 pm #48154Anonymous
GuestMichael Nesmar was always my favorite [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img]
——————
“The best defense is a strong offense.. and I intend to start offending right now.”
-James T. Kirk[This message has been edited by X (edited August 07, 2001).]
7th August 2001 at 7:32 pm #48155Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by trillian:
[b]*holds out hand for a great debate* [/b]
You want to debate your hand?
Well, I guess it takes all kinds.Honestly, I *completely* understand where you’re coming from, except for the motherhood part, since I’m not a mother. [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img] No offense meant in anything I said. Just a debate. [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img]
–Aleck
7th August 2001 at 7:49 pm #48156Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by X:
[b]Michael Nesmar was always my favorite [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img]
[/b]
Well, the Nez *is* a Texan, after all.
–Aleck
7th August 2001 at 8:01 pm #48157Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Aleck:
[b] Who was better: Micky Dolenz or Davy Jones? Then we compromised and said that it was Michael Nesmith.–Aleck[/b]
Jeez, some people! Everyone knows it was Peter Tork. [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/tongue.gif[/img]
——————
Kali
——-
Unlike Modo the Dwarf, Sergeant Colon did not know the meaning of the word “irony”. He thought it meant “sort of like iron”. – [i]ReaperMan[/i]7th August 2001 at 9:24 pm #48158Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Kali:
[b] Jeez, some people! Everyone knows it was Peter Tork. [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/tongue.gif[/img][/b]
LOL yeah Kali I loved him in those Pizza Hutt commercials and in his guest role on “Wings” [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img]
-SM
——————
“Your wrong this is one hell of a planet!”
-ATF agent in “Texx Lexx”[This message has been edited by Slopmaster (edited August 07, 2001).]
7th August 2001 at 11:58 pm #48159trillian
Participant*evil giggle as she debates her hand* No, it was Davy Jones. He’s short.
*hand* No sir, it was Nesmith! I tell ‘ya!
*trillian* OH, now your just being difficult.
*hand* No I’m not, I’m having an argument.
*trillian* being contrary does not an argument make. your being difficult.
*hand* No I’m not…
*trillian* Yes you are….
*hand* No I’m not….And etc!
[img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/tongue.gif[/img]
——————
“…we will be restoring normality just as soon as we are sure what normal is anyway.”8th August 2001 at 1:59 am #48160Anonymous
GuestTrillian, I’m so glad I’m not the only one who has conversations with various parts of their anatomy.
Only the other day I was having a lengthy discussion with my little toe about Lexx, well there was no one on the board at the time, and it had some interesting points to put forward.
Then just to make matters worse, my index finger joined in, and things got a little heated between the three of us, and people say that you should listen to what your body is trying to tell you…well I’m not doing that again!!!
Squishy——————
Squishy9th August 2001 at 2:44 am #48161trillian
Participant
quote:
Originally posted by Squish:
[b]Then just to make matters worse, my index finger joined in, and things got a little heated between the three of us, and people say that you should listen to what your body is trying to tell you…well I’m not doing that again!!!
Squishy[/b]
Oh, I hear ‘ya! Pinky toes are so darn CRANKY! With an index finger jumping in, what a mess that must of been! Those index fingers are so pushy! I find my elbow to be the friendliest, just kind of hanging out, being useful, and makes you laugh when you hit it! How extremely laid back can you get! I highly suggest getting to know your elbow, I don’t think enough people do that now a days!
*returning you to your version of normality*
[img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img]——————
“…we will be restoring normality just as soon as we are sure what normal is anyway.”9th August 2001 at 7:10 pm #48162Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Squish:
[b]Trillian, I’m so glad I’m not the only one who has conversations with various parts of their anatomy.[/b]
I some times talk to my penis. I tell it “no not here little Slop! Just wait till we get home” Its not so much I think with it as it thinks on its own and drags me along for the ride.
-SM
——————
“Your wrong this is one hell of a planet!”
-ATF agent in “Texx Lexx”9th August 2001 at 11:18 pm #48163Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by Slopmaster:
[b] [QUOTE]Originally posted by Squish:
[b]Trillian, I’m so glad I’m not the only one who has conversations with various parts of their anatomy.[/b]
I some times talk to my penis. I tell it “no not here little Slop! Just wait till we get home” Its not so much I think with it as it thinks on its own and drags me along for the ride.
SM, I think most the adult male population in the world has a conversation with their dicks at some point in their lives, for me it’s weekly!!!
I keep asking if it will ever grow up and be an adult dick, and the smug arrogant so and so just refuses to answer, so now I just ignore it.
And I wish it would behave itself a bit more in public, one day I’m going to get arrested for it’s actions, and the cops will never believe me when I tell them it wasn’t me…the bloody thing is always trying get me into trouble!!!
Squishy-SM
[/B][/QUOTE]
——————
Squishy11th August 2001 at 10:39 am #48164Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by trillian:
[b]Backing up to Clinton as president. Like I mentioned before, I’m hard pressed to think what policies he passed that had a positive effect on the well being of the American people. Everyone said what a great job he did…but what, EXACTLY did he do? I really need a reminder on that.[/b]
I’ve been absent for a dog’s age and I’ve gotta say, this is a most excellent, albeit lengthy, thread. I’ve only gotten this far so if someone answered this already, sorry for being repetitious. One thing Clinton did which helped me immensely when my mom got into a bad car wreck was pass The Family Leave Act in ’93. Her accident was in ’94. I needed to take off almost two months to help with her rehabilitation. Because of that law, I was able to do so without having the added burden of worrrying whether I’d lose my job. Bubba was a freak but he was an effective freak. If you’re interested, there’s a list of Clinton’s doings in office at this site. Anyway, again, you peeps got a groovy discussion goin’ here. [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img]
[This message has been edited by BlackCloud (edited August 11, 2001).]
14th August 2001 at 12:55 am #48165trillian
Participant
quote:
Originally posted by BlackCloud:
[b] …One thing Clinton did which helped me immensely when my mom got into a bad car wreck was pass The Family Leave Act in ’93. Her accident was in ’94. I needed to take off almost two months to help with her rehabilitation. Because of that law, I was able to do so without having the added burden of worrrying whether I’d lose my job. Bubba was a freak but he was an effective freak….. . [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img][This message has been edited by BlackCloud (edited August 11, 2001).][/b]
Thanks BC. I did find an article, I think I posted a link to it, that I really thought was excellent. (no sarcasm there) It discussed the things he did in office(including laws passed), and the troubles he had, and I got a good reminder of what I was looking for.
[img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/smile.gif[/img]
14th August 2001 at 4:58 am #48166Anonymous
GuestWell, I was debating with my fingers on SciFi’s treatment of LEXX. I asked them if they thought SciFi was really doing their best at promoting LEXX and giving it a fair shake. The only two fingers who rose up were both middle fingers on each hand.
——————
“The best defense is a strong offense.. and I intend to start offending right now.”
-James T. Kirk14th August 2001 at 6:29 am #48167Anonymous
Guest[QUOTE]Originally posted by X:
[B]Well, I was debating with my fingers on SciFi’s treatment of LEXX. I asked them if they thought SciFi was really doing their best at promoting LEXX and giving it a fair shake. The only two fingers who rose up were both middle fingers on each hand.Same happens to me X, I just can’t control them, I asked the Doc what was wrong while I had my two middle fingers stuck up at him, he said I had a variation on Turots syndrome.
He asked when it first started, and I replied that it began around the time UK Sci-fi made it obvious they weren’t going to show Lexx S4 anytime soon.
He then asked ‘What’s a Lexx?’
I said ‘Doctor, Lexx is something that you must experience for yourself, you will never be quite the same again’
Later I heard that the Doc had suddenly left England for the US, leaving his five children and a wife behind, his secretary apparently heard him saying ‘Must get to the states, they’ve got it, they’ve got it’…he hasn’t been heard from since!!!
Just goes to show you the effect Lexx can have on some people.
Squishy——————
Squishy15th August 2001 at 1:59 am #48168Anonymous
GuestHi, just dropping by.
17th August 2001 at 5:26 am #48169Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by trillian:
[b] I’m pretty sure that taxi drivers in New York would be hard pressed to find an unknown street with a bed and breakfast they had never heard of.[/b]
i am in this really late because of my traumatic move from brooklyn to florida but i feel honor bound to defend my spiritual home (nyc) NEW YORKERS ARE HELPFUL, CHATTY AND FRIENDLY! and so are people in the uk…and being an immigrant, largely from the east coast, i call us the states, because canadians are ” americans” too! by the way squish, you are a doll, and this is a great discussion fx
17th August 2001 at 5:42 am #48170Anonymous
Guestphew i am glad i posted before the rest of this…good thread guys, and remind me not to debate politics with any of you [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img] (i always vote democrat, but as you all know, there ain’t nothing dumber than a new york democrat [img]http://www.sadgeezer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif[/img])
17th August 2001 at 6:04 am #48171Flamegrape
ParticipantThis post has no purpose other than to add yet another post to this thread. Fnord.
17th August 2001 at 6:59 am #48172Anonymous
Guest
quote:
Originally posted by FX:
[b] [QUOTE]Originally posted by trillian:
[b] I’m pretty sure that taxi drivers in New York would be hard pressed to find an unknown street with a bed and breakfast they had never heard of.[/b]
i am in this really late because of my traumatic move from brooklyn to florida but i feel honor bound to defend my spiritual home (nyc) NEW YORKERS ARE HELPFUL, CHATTY AND FRIENDLY! and so are people in the uk…and being an immigrant, largely from the east coast, i call us the states, because canadians are ” americans” too! by the way squish, you are a doll, and this is a great discussion fx[/B][/QUOTE]
Thanx FX, you are a doll also!!!, I think I learnt more about the US in this thread than I could have done by watching the news, the views have been very diverse but very interesting.
I imagine that like the UK you have some people who are not so nice, but this little group on the board just seemed to show the nice side to America, if it was up to me I’d make you all ambassadors for the US!!!
Hope you are enjoying life in sunny Florida, and I’m sure the trauma has been worth it, as you don’t need to go far for a holiday!!!
Squishy.
P.S Sorry about the Annoyed Squishy, that happened because I was miffed at losing my original registry and had to log on as a new member, which also means I’ve been demoted back to aspiring Sadgeezer…if you’re reading this Sad, can you do something about this. -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.