Re: (OT:) Why do I have such a strong dislike for Ragheads?
10-28-2007 | 03:31 PM
#61
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) New Energy Sources... Was: Why do I have such a strongdislike for Ragheads?
F.H. wrote:
> Enrico Fermi wrote:
>> "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may
>> be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons
>> than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may
>> sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those
>> who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they
>> do so with the approval of their own conscience."
>> -- C.S. Lewis
>
> Lewis underestimates the all encompassing nature of greed. Genetics
> suggests an endless supply of wannabe "robber barons" and history show
> no record of any "satiation point."
>
> Lewis described his younger self as "very angry with God for not
> existing". Apparently when he discovered God he then channeled his
> anger towards what he saw in Church on Sunday ("those who torment us for
> our own good will torment us without end").
>
> And sure enough, in a rigged game with that pesky mortality always
> playing in the background he finds plenty to agree. And disagree.
Good an evil are human inventions. It has been a long time since I read
C.S.Lewis. He did seem to have suffered the deeper implications of god
and morality.
If anyone that has read Lewis and hasn't read 'The Screwtape Letters', I
highly recommend it...
> Enrico Fermi wrote:
>> "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may
>> be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons
>> than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may
>> sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those
>> who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they
>> do so with the approval of their own conscience."
>> -- C.S. Lewis
>
> Lewis underestimates the all encompassing nature of greed. Genetics
> suggests an endless supply of wannabe "robber barons" and history show
> no record of any "satiation point."
>
> Lewis described his younger self as "very angry with God for not
> existing". Apparently when he discovered God he then channeled his
> anger towards what he saw in Church on Sunday ("those who torment us for
> our own good will torment us without end").
>
> And sure enough, in a rigged game with that pesky mortality always
> playing in the background he finds plenty to agree. And disagree.
Good an evil are human inventions. It has been a long time since I read
C.S.Lewis. He did seem to have suffered the deeper implications of god
and morality.
If anyone that has read Lewis and hasn't read 'The Screwtape Letters', I
highly recommend it...
10-28-2007 | 03:48 PM
#62
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) Why do I have such a strong dislike for Ragheads?
bill wrote:
| Course, if I and a million like me all did the best we could do,
| it still wouldn't amount to one nuclear reactors worth of
| difference, but hey, like you said, it's what I can do.
I'd like to suggest, most respectfully, that if you and a million
others like you all picked a problem to solve, the end result (we can
agree on this one) probably won't be a nuclear power plant - but
that's just too many people not to make some kind of difference.
The real problem is that too many people don't want to get off their
butts unless they can become either heros or obscenely wealthy (or
both). The "I can't make a difference" is a lie they tell themselves
to justify non-participation.
From what I've heard, it takes about fifteen years to finalize a
design, build, and bring a nuke on-line - and that there hasn't been
much of that kind of activity for the past quarter-century. The only
reasonable interpretation I can put on this is that we won't be seeing
significant growth in nuclear power generation for at least the next
fifteen years.
If I'm understanding the news properly, and if the $90/bbl crude oil
price isn't just a "blip", then it may well be that everything
constructive that any of us can do will turn out to make a
difference - no matter how small it might seem as it's done...
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
| Course, if I and a million like me all did the best we could do,
| it still wouldn't amount to one nuclear reactors worth of
| difference, but hey, like you said, it's what I can do.
I'd like to suggest, most respectfully, that if you and a million
others like you all picked a problem to solve, the end result (we can
agree on this one) probably won't be a nuclear power plant - but
that's just too many people not to make some kind of difference.
The real problem is that too many people don't want to get off their
butts unless they can become either heros or obscenely wealthy (or
both). The "I can't make a difference" is a lie they tell themselves
to justify non-participation.
From what I've heard, it takes about fifteen years to finalize a
design, build, and bring a nuke on-line - and that there hasn't been
much of that kind of activity for the past quarter-century. The only
reasonable interpretation I can put on this is that we won't be seeing
significant growth in nuclear power generation for at least the next
fifteen years.
If I'm understanding the news properly, and if the $90/bbl crude oil
price isn't just a "blip", then it may well be that everything
constructive that any of us can do will turn out to make a
difference - no matter how small it might seem as it's done...
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
10-28-2007 | 03:48 PM
#63
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) Why do I have such a strong dislike for Ragheads?
bill wrote:
| Course, if I and a million like me all did the best we could do,
| it still wouldn't amount to one nuclear reactors worth of
| difference, but hey, like you said, it's what I can do.
I'd like to suggest, most respectfully, that if you and a million
others like you all picked a problem to solve, the end result (we can
agree on this one) probably won't be a nuclear power plant - but
that's just too many people not to make some kind of difference.
The real problem is that too many people don't want to get off their
butts unless they can become either heros or obscenely wealthy (or
both). The "I can't make a difference" is a lie they tell themselves
to justify non-participation.
From what I've heard, it takes about fifteen years to finalize a
design, build, and bring a nuke on-line - and that there hasn't been
much of that kind of activity for the past quarter-century. The only
reasonable interpretation I can put on this is that we won't be seeing
significant growth in nuclear power generation for at least the next
fifteen years.
If I'm understanding the news properly, and if the $90/bbl crude oil
price isn't just a "blip", then it may well be that everything
constructive that any of us can do will turn out to make a
difference - no matter how small it might seem as it's done...
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
| Course, if I and a million like me all did the best we could do,
| it still wouldn't amount to one nuclear reactors worth of
| difference, but hey, like you said, it's what I can do.
I'd like to suggest, most respectfully, that if you and a million
others like you all picked a problem to solve, the end result (we can
agree on this one) probably won't be a nuclear power plant - but
that's just too many people not to make some kind of difference.
The real problem is that too many people don't want to get off their
butts unless they can become either heros or obscenely wealthy (or
both). The "I can't make a difference" is a lie they tell themselves
to justify non-participation.
From what I've heard, it takes about fifteen years to finalize a
design, build, and bring a nuke on-line - and that there hasn't been
much of that kind of activity for the past quarter-century. The only
reasonable interpretation I can put on this is that we won't be seeing
significant growth in nuclear power generation for at least the next
fifteen years.
If I'm understanding the news properly, and if the $90/bbl crude oil
price isn't just a "blip", then it may well be that everything
constructive that any of us can do will turn out to make a
difference - no matter how small it might seem as it's done...
--
Morris Dovey
DeSoto Solar
DeSoto, Iowa USA
http://www.iedu.com/DeSoto/
10-28-2007 | 04:18 PM
#64
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) Why do I have such a strong dislike for Ragheads?
> | Course, if I and a million like me all did the best we could do,
> | it still wouldn't amount to one nuclear reactors worth of
> | difference, but hey, like you said, it's what I can do.
>
> I'd like to suggest, most respectfully, that if you and a million
> others like you all picked a problem to solve, the end result (we can
> agree on this one) probably won't be a nuclear power plant - but
> that's just too many people not to make some kind of difference.
Okay, say that I can retrofit 100 cars/year to get 33% better
fuel economy. that would be a refit of the entire us fleet in roughly
1 million man years. Now, taking an average car getting 30 mpg
prerefit and 40 mpg postrefit (optimistic)and are driven 10,000 miles
per year, that means that my endeavors can save approx 333 - 250 =
8300 gallons of gasoline per year/year for roughly 10 years. sounds
pretty good until you really work the math and figure out that if the
entire us fleet could be refitted in a year (providing employment for
the previously mentioned million people) that would offset only 2
years of growth in demand from china and india.
This is a seriously large scale problem, and it really does kinda
need seriously large scale solutions. That doesn't mean by any
stretch of the imagination not to implement the small scale grassroots
stuff, but suffer no delusions, it is not, and will never be a
solution to any problem or part of a problem. This problem can only
really be solved by market forces and the big boys.
The good news is that the big boys are starting to wake up to it,
so solutions might well be forthcoming if we the people will only get
the out of the way.
> The real problem is that too many people don't want to get off their
> butts unless they can become either heros or obscenely wealthy (or
> both). The "I can't make a difference" is a lie they tell themselves
> to justify non-participation.
>
> From what I've heard, it takes about fifteen years to finalize a
> design, build, and bring a nuke on-line - and that there hasn't been
> much of that kind of activity for the past quarter-century. The only
> reasonable interpretation I can put on this is that we won't be seeing
> significant growth in nuclear power generation for at least the next
> fifteen years.
>
> If I'm understanding the news properly, and if the $90/bbl crude oil
> price isn't just a "blip", then it may well be that everything
> constructive that any of us can do will turn out to make a
> difference - no matter how small it might seem as it's done...
> | it still wouldn't amount to one nuclear reactors worth of
> | difference, but hey, like you said, it's what I can do.
>
> I'd like to suggest, most respectfully, that if you and a million
> others like you all picked a problem to solve, the end result (we can
> agree on this one) probably won't be a nuclear power plant - but
> that's just too many people not to make some kind of difference.
Okay, say that I can retrofit 100 cars/year to get 33% better
fuel economy. that would be a refit of the entire us fleet in roughly
1 million man years. Now, taking an average car getting 30 mpg
prerefit and 40 mpg postrefit (optimistic)and are driven 10,000 miles
per year, that means that my endeavors can save approx 333 - 250 =
8300 gallons of gasoline per year/year for roughly 10 years. sounds
pretty good until you really work the math and figure out that if the
entire us fleet could be refitted in a year (providing employment for
the previously mentioned million people) that would offset only 2
years of growth in demand from china and india.
This is a seriously large scale problem, and it really does kinda
need seriously large scale solutions. That doesn't mean by any
stretch of the imagination not to implement the small scale grassroots
stuff, but suffer no delusions, it is not, and will never be a
solution to any problem or part of a problem. This problem can only
really be solved by market forces and the big boys.
The good news is that the big boys are starting to wake up to it,
so solutions might well be forthcoming if we the people will only get
the out of the way.
> The real problem is that too many people don't want to get off their
> butts unless they can become either heros or obscenely wealthy (or
> both). The "I can't make a difference" is a lie they tell themselves
> to justify non-participation.
>
> From what I've heard, it takes about fifteen years to finalize a
> design, build, and bring a nuke on-line - and that there hasn't been
> much of that kind of activity for the past quarter-century. The only
> reasonable interpretation I can put on this is that we won't be seeing
> significant growth in nuclear power generation for at least the next
> fifteen years.
>
> If I'm understanding the news properly, and if the $90/bbl crude oil
> price isn't just a "blip", then it may well be that everything
> constructive that any of us can do will turn out to make a
> difference - no matter how small it might seem as it's done...
10-28-2007 | 04:18 PM
#65
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) Why do I have such a strong dislike for Ragheads?
> | Course, if I and a million like me all did the best we could do,
> | it still wouldn't amount to one nuclear reactors worth of
> | difference, but hey, like you said, it's what I can do.
>
> I'd like to suggest, most respectfully, that if you and a million
> others like you all picked a problem to solve, the end result (we can
> agree on this one) probably won't be a nuclear power plant - but
> that's just too many people not to make some kind of difference.
Okay, say that I can retrofit 100 cars/year to get 33% better
fuel economy. that would be a refit of the entire us fleet in roughly
1 million man years. Now, taking an average car getting 30 mpg
prerefit and 40 mpg postrefit (optimistic)and are driven 10,000 miles
per year, that means that my endeavors can save approx 333 - 250 =
8300 gallons of gasoline per year/year for roughly 10 years. sounds
pretty good until you really work the math and figure out that if the
entire us fleet could be refitted in a year (providing employment for
the previously mentioned million people) that would offset only 2
years of growth in demand from china and india.
This is a seriously large scale problem, and it really does kinda
need seriously large scale solutions. That doesn't mean by any
stretch of the imagination not to implement the small scale grassroots
stuff, but suffer no delusions, it is not, and will never be a
solution to any problem or part of a problem. This problem can only
really be solved by market forces and the big boys.
The good news is that the big boys are starting to wake up to it,
so solutions might well be forthcoming if we the people will only get
the out of the way.
> The real problem is that too many people don't want to get off their
> butts unless they can become either heros or obscenely wealthy (or
> both). The "I can't make a difference" is a lie they tell themselves
> to justify non-participation.
>
> From what I've heard, it takes about fifteen years to finalize a
> design, build, and bring a nuke on-line - and that there hasn't been
> much of that kind of activity for the past quarter-century. The only
> reasonable interpretation I can put on this is that we won't be seeing
> significant growth in nuclear power generation for at least the next
> fifteen years.
>
> If I'm understanding the news properly, and if the $90/bbl crude oil
> price isn't just a "blip", then it may well be that everything
> constructive that any of us can do will turn out to make a
> difference - no matter how small it might seem as it's done...
> | it still wouldn't amount to one nuclear reactors worth of
> | difference, but hey, like you said, it's what I can do.
>
> I'd like to suggest, most respectfully, that if you and a million
> others like you all picked a problem to solve, the end result (we can
> agree on this one) probably won't be a nuclear power plant - but
> that's just too many people not to make some kind of difference.
Okay, say that I can retrofit 100 cars/year to get 33% better
fuel economy. that would be a refit of the entire us fleet in roughly
1 million man years. Now, taking an average car getting 30 mpg
prerefit and 40 mpg postrefit (optimistic)and are driven 10,000 miles
per year, that means that my endeavors can save approx 333 - 250 =
8300 gallons of gasoline per year/year for roughly 10 years. sounds
pretty good until you really work the math and figure out that if the
entire us fleet could be refitted in a year (providing employment for
the previously mentioned million people) that would offset only 2
years of growth in demand from china and india.
This is a seriously large scale problem, and it really does kinda
need seriously large scale solutions. That doesn't mean by any
stretch of the imagination not to implement the small scale grassroots
stuff, but suffer no delusions, it is not, and will never be a
solution to any problem or part of a problem. This problem can only
really be solved by market forces and the big boys.
The good news is that the big boys are starting to wake up to it,
so solutions might well be forthcoming if we the people will only get
the out of the way.
> The real problem is that too many people don't want to get off their
> butts unless they can become either heros or obscenely wealthy (or
> both). The "I can't make a difference" is a lie they tell themselves
> to justify non-participation.
>
> From what I've heard, it takes about fifteen years to finalize a
> design, build, and bring a nuke on-line - and that there hasn't been
> much of that kind of activity for the past quarter-century. The only
> reasonable interpretation I can put on this is that we won't be seeing
> significant growth in nuclear power generation for at least the next
> fifteen years.
>
> If I'm understanding the news properly, and if the $90/bbl crude oil
> price isn't just a "blip", then it may well be that everything
> constructive that any of us can do will turn out to make a
> difference - no matter how small it might seem as it's done...
10-28-2007 | 04:43 PM
#66
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) Why do I have such a strong dislike for Ragheads?
bill wrote:
> On Oct 27, 9:48 pm, Hachiroku <Tru...@AE86.gts> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:46:56 -0700, bill wrote:
>>
>>> In the town where I live, there is a planned 500 MW windfarm. It
>>>is being hotly disputed on NIMBY grounds. The most recent planned nuclear
>>>power plant (seabrook) in the US was fully constructed and never went
>>>operational due to environmentalism. This crap has got to stop.
>>
>>Are you in Mass by any chance? There was one that was killed about 15
>>miles from where I live, and the company went further west to the next
>>best site, where they are also meeting strong opposition.
>>
>>The funny thing is, the one posing the opposition are also the ones crying
>>for independance from Foreign Oil and coal and nuclear power plants.
>>
>>Can't have it ALL ways, people!
>
>
> Right. brings to mind ted kennedy killing the offshore windfarm
> near the cape.
> Fact is, if ya can't build anything, anywhere, then how do you
> intend to produce anything?
> If you cannot drill where the oil is, you will need to import it
> from countries that aren't as stupid. If you cannot build CTL plants,
> then you'll need to burn oil. If you cannot build coal or nuclear
> power plants then you'll need to squander the remaining natural gas.
> We simply have entirely too many *********** in this country who
> expect leaders selected by the populace to be different to the
> populace. Our people are dumber than dirt, so we select leaders whose
> plans are even dumber. Problem isn't Bush or any leadership, we live
> in a world where the leadership is the people, problem is, the people
> are a bunch of stupid ***** who just wait for "leadership", as a
> result of which, we are where we are.
> solution is easy. Drill in anwr to buy a little time, build
> nuclear power plants to replace the coal and natural gas plants, Build
> coal to liquid plants and gas to liquid plants to cover the next 30 or
> 50 years, and start heavy research on PHEVs while realigning our
> development style to support public transportation. it's simple, it's
> feasible, and it would work. we are not doing it for the same reason
> we aren't doing anything else, we are simply too dumb.
>
As much as I hate to say it, you're right.
But, even dumb people are aimless critters without the right leadership.
JT
10-28-2007 | 04:43 PM
#67
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) Why do I have such a strong dislike for Ragheads?
bill wrote:
> On Oct 27, 9:48 pm, Hachiroku <Tru...@AE86.gts> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:46:56 -0700, bill wrote:
>>
>>> In the town where I live, there is a planned 500 MW windfarm. It
>>>is being hotly disputed on NIMBY grounds. The most recent planned nuclear
>>>power plant (seabrook) in the US was fully constructed and never went
>>>operational due to environmentalism. This crap has got to stop.
>>
>>Are you in Mass by any chance? There was one that was killed about 15
>>miles from where I live, and the company went further west to the next
>>best site, where they are also meeting strong opposition.
>>
>>The funny thing is, the one posing the opposition are also the ones crying
>>for independance from Foreign Oil and coal and nuclear power plants.
>>
>>Can't have it ALL ways, people!
>
>
> Right. brings to mind ted kennedy killing the offshore windfarm
> near the cape.
> Fact is, if ya can't build anything, anywhere, then how do you
> intend to produce anything?
> If you cannot drill where the oil is, you will need to import it
> from countries that aren't as stupid. If you cannot build CTL plants,
> then you'll need to burn oil. If you cannot build coal or nuclear
> power plants then you'll need to squander the remaining natural gas.
> We simply have entirely too many *********** in this country who
> expect leaders selected by the populace to be different to the
> populace. Our people are dumber than dirt, so we select leaders whose
> plans are even dumber. Problem isn't Bush or any leadership, we live
> in a world where the leadership is the people, problem is, the people
> are a bunch of stupid ***** who just wait for "leadership", as a
> result of which, we are where we are.
> solution is easy. Drill in anwr to buy a little time, build
> nuclear power plants to replace the coal and natural gas plants, Build
> coal to liquid plants and gas to liquid plants to cover the next 30 or
> 50 years, and start heavy research on PHEVs while realigning our
> development style to support public transportation. it's simple, it's
> feasible, and it would work. we are not doing it for the same reason
> we aren't doing anything else, we are simply too dumb.
>
As much as I hate to say it, you're right.
But, even dumb people are aimless critters without the right leadership.
JT
10-28-2007 | 04:52 PM
#68
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) New Energy Sources... Was: Why do I have such a strongdislike for Ragheads?
Hachiroku ハチク wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 14:47:25 +0000, Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Hachiroku ハチク wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:46:56 -0700, bill wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> In the town where I live, there is a planned 500 MW windfarm. It
>>>>is being hotly disputed on NIMBY grounds. The most recent planned
>>>>nuclear power plant (seabrook) in the US was fully constructed and never
>>>>went operational due to environmentalism. This crap has got to stop.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Are you in Mass by any chance? There was one that was killed about 15
>>>miles from where I live, and the company went further west to the next
>>>best site, where they are also meeting strong opposition.
>>>
>>>The funny thing is, the one posing the opposition are also the ones
>>>crying for independance from Foreign Oil and coal and nuclear power
>>>plants.
>>>
>>>Can't have it ALL ways, people!
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>That's for sure.
>>
>>To clarify, the original Seabrook (Unit 1) was completed and is
>>operational today. It is Unit 2 that was never completed and later
>>canceled.
>>
>>That said, nuclear power is the only interim option for energy
>>independence or at least a reduction in dependence on foreign sources of
>>fossil fuels.
>
>
>
> Wind power is excellent, and after the intial outlay, it's free.
> I don't know why the Cruchies/Granolas in Western Mass have such an
> aversion to it.
>
Well, it ain't quite free... The systems must be maintained.
I would favor windmills for individual residences and these are indeed
productive.
When it comes to large windmill farms, there are issues and probably
most of these facilities should be limited to rural flattish areas.
You know, "Not in my back yard buster!"
>
>>I'm afraid that we have lost our way and are doomed to a role of third
>>world status and already have made considerable progress in that
>>direction.
>>
>>Sometimes, I think that the country would be better off under a benevolent
>>dictator than our current free for all form of government. At least we
>>would not be subject to continuous political bombardment that never seems
>>to end or ever produces anything of worth for that matter...
>>
>>JT
>
>
> Problem is, WHO? Hitlary? BWAHAHAHA!
>
I'm no fan of Ms Clinton but really do not see the potential for
leadership such as JFK or Reagan anywhere on the horizon.
> Anyone who gets in there will either sway with his/her particular 'group',
> or not pay attention to anyone and probably end up power hungry.
>
> It's supposed to be Majority Rule, but the fact is, the Squeaky Wheel gets
> greased, and the Squeaky Wheel are usually the k00ks...
>
The "squeaky" wheel indeed gets the grease. I proved that last year
when I had land line problems and finally complained to the PUC in TX.
The next day, two technicians, a division manager and his assistant
showed up at my doorstep.
I even got the "private" executive number should I have further problems.
Ya gotta be persistant and a PIA to boot!
<G>
JT
10-28-2007 | 04:52 PM
#69
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) New Energy Sources... Was: Why do I have such a strongdislike for Ragheads?
Hachiroku ハチク wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 14:47:25 +0000, Grumpy AuContraire wrote:
>
>
>>
>>Hachiroku ハチク wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 20:46:56 -0700, bill wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> In the town where I live, there is a planned 500 MW windfarm. It
>>>>is being hotly disputed on NIMBY grounds. The most recent planned
>>>>nuclear power plant (seabrook) in the US was fully constructed and never
>>>>went operational due to environmentalism. This crap has got to stop.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Are you in Mass by any chance? There was one that was killed about 15
>>>miles from where I live, and the company went further west to the next
>>>best site, where they are also meeting strong opposition.
>>>
>>>The funny thing is, the one posing the opposition are also the ones
>>>crying for independance from Foreign Oil and coal and nuclear power
>>>plants.
>>>
>>>Can't have it ALL ways, people!
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>That's for sure.
>>
>>To clarify, the original Seabrook (Unit 1) was completed and is
>>operational today. It is Unit 2 that was never completed and later
>>canceled.
>>
>>That said, nuclear power is the only interim option for energy
>>independence or at least a reduction in dependence on foreign sources of
>>fossil fuels.
>
>
>
> Wind power is excellent, and after the intial outlay, it's free.
> I don't know why the Cruchies/Granolas in Western Mass have such an
> aversion to it.
>
Well, it ain't quite free... The systems must be maintained.
I would favor windmills for individual residences and these are indeed
productive.
When it comes to large windmill farms, there are issues and probably
most of these facilities should be limited to rural flattish areas.
You know, "Not in my back yard buster!"
>
>>I'm afraid that we have lost our way and are doomed to a role of third
>>world status and already have made considerable progress in that
>>direction.
>>
>>Sometimes, I think that the country would be better off under a benevolent
>>dictator than our current free for all form of government. At least we
>>would not be subject to continuous political bombardment that never seems
>>to end or ever produces anything of worth for that matter...
>>
>>JT
>
>
> Problem is, WHO? Hitlary? BWAHAHAHA!
>
I'm no fan of Ms Clinton but really do not see the potential for
leadership such as JFK or Reagan anywhere on the horizon.
> Anyone who gets in there will either sway with his/her particular 'group',
> or not pay attention to anyone and probably end up power hungry.
>
> It's supposed to be Majority Rule, but the fact is, the Squeaky Wheel gets
> greased, and the Squeaky Wheel are usually the k00ks...
>
The "squeaky" wheel indeed gets the grease. I proved that last year
when I had land line problems and finally complained to the PUC in TX.
The next day, two technicians, a division manager and his assistant
showed up at my doorstep.
I even got the "private" executive number should I have further problems.
Ya gotta be persistant and a PIA to boot!
<G>
JT
10-28-2007 | 05:03 PM
#70
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) Why do I have such a strong dislike for Ragheads?
bill wrote:
> On Oct 28, 12:14 pm, Hachiroku <Tru...@AE86.gts> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 08:08:15 -0700, bill wrote:
>>
>>> solution is easy. Drill in anwr to buy a little time, build
>>>nuclear power plants to replace the coal and natural gas plants, Build
>>>coal to liquid plants and gas to liquid plants to cover the next 30 or 50
>>>years, and start heavy research on PHEVs while realigning our development
>>>style to support public transportation. it's simple, it's feasible, and
>>>it would work. we are not doing it for the same reason we aren't doing
>>>anything else, we are simply too dumb.
>>
>>The only problem with these ideas, Bill:
>>
>>They exhibit Common Sense. It'sll never fly.
>>
>>And tell me the Democrats aren't just as connected to the oil companies as
>>the Republicans.
>>
>>At the end of the day, in the smokey back rooms and the brandy flowing,
>>it's all just the Good Old Boys Club...http://www.poopreport.com/Doctor/Content/float.html
>
>
> you give them too much credit. if they had the levels of control
> and foresight you are crediting them with, there would be no reason
> for concern. This situation happened not because some plutocrats
> decided it should happen, it happened because a bunch of small mindedhttp://www.heptune.com/poop.html
> little maggots no different from you and I decided that the
> alternatives SHOULDN'T happen. floats.
>
I just couldn't resist...
www.heptune.com/poop.html
www.heptune.com/poop.html
Hope this helps...
<G>
JT
10-28-2007 | 05:03 PM
#71
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) Why do I have such a strong dislike for Ragheads?
bill wrote:
> On Oct 28, 12:14 pm, Hachiroku <Tru...@AE86.gts> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 28 Oct 2007 08:08:15 -0700, bill wrote:
>>
>>> solution is easy. Drill in anwr to buy a little time, build
>>>nuclear power plants to replace the coal and natural gas plants, Build
>>>coal to liquid plants and gas to liquid plants to cover the next 30 or 50
>>>years, and start heavy research on PHEVs while realigning our development
>>>style to support public transportation. it's simple, it's feasible, and
>>>it would work. we are not doing it for the same reason we aren't doing
>>>anything else, we are simply too dumb.
>>
>>The only problem with these ideas, Bill:
>>
>>They exhibit Common Sense. It'sll never fly.
>>
>>And tell me the Democrats aren't just as connected to the oil companies as
>>the Republicans.
>>
>>At the end of the day, in the smokey back rooms and the brandy flowing,
>>it's all just the Good Old Boys Club...http://www.poopreport.com/Doctor/Content/float.html
>
>
> you give them too much credit. if they had the levels of control
> and foresight you are crediting them with, there would be no reason
> for concern. This situation happened not because some plutocrats
> decided it should happen, it happened because a bunch of small mindedhttp://www.heptune.com/poop.html
> little maggots no different from you and I decided that the
> alternatives SHOULDN'T happen. floats.
>
I just couldn't resist...
www.heptune.com/poop.html
www.heptune.com/poop.html
Hope this helps...
<G>
JT
10-28-2007 | 06:07 PM
#72
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) Why do I have such a strong dislike Zionist Satanist Banksters?
On Oct 28, 12:18 pm, bill <ford_prefec...@hotmail.com> wrote:
The good news is that the big boys are starting to wake up to
it,
> so solutions might well be forthcoming if we the people will only get
> the out of the way.
That is just what the "Big Boys" are going to do.
"Get them the out of the way."
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...7_end_game.htm
80% population reduction will easily solve the problem.
While the top is one percent of that left over has the other 99%
serving those elite.
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/s...ro_project.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1965
http://rense.com/general78/root.htm
The again we might have a slave revolt?
The good news is that the big boys are starting to wake up to
it,
> so solutions might well be forthcoming if we the people will only get
> the out of the way.
That is just what the "Big Boys" are going to do.
"Get them the out of the way."
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...7_end_game.htm
80% population reduction will easily solve the problem.
While the top is one percent of that left over has the other 99%
serving those elite.
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/s...ro_project.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1965
http://rense.com/general78/root.htm
The again we might have a slave revolt?
10-28-2007 | 06:07 PM
#73
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) Why do I have such a strong dislike Zionist Satanist Banksters?
On Oct 28, 12:18 pm, bill <ford_prefec...@hotmail.com> wrote:
The good news is that the big boys are starting to wake up to
it,
> so solutions might well be forthcoming if we the people will only get
> the out of the way.
That is just what the "Big Boys" are going to do.
"Get them the out of the way."
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...7_end_game.htm
80% population reduction will easily solve the problem.
While the top is one percent of that left over has the other 99%
serving those elite.
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/s...ro_project.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1965
http://rense.com/general78/root.htm
The again we might have a slave revolt?
The good news is that the big boys are starting to wake up to
it,
> so solutions might well be forthcoming if we the people will only get
> the out of the way.
That is just what the "Big Boys" are going to do.
"Get them the out of the way."
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles...7_end_game.htm
80% population reduction will easily solve the problem.
While the top is one percent of that left over has the other 99%
serving those elite.
http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/s...ro_project.htm
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1965
http://rense.com/general78/root.htm
The again we might have a slave revolt?
10-28-2007 | 06:37 PM
#74
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) New Energy Sources... Was: Why do I have such a strongdislike for Ragheads?
Dan Bloomquist wrote:
> F.H. wrote:
>> Enrico Fermi wrote:
>
>>> "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims
>>> may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber
>>> barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's
>>> cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be
>>> satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us
>>> without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
>>> -- C.S. Lewis
>>
>> Lewis underestimates the all encompassing nature of greed. Genetics
>> suggests an endless supply of wannabe "robber barons" and history show
>> no record of any "satiation point."
>>
>> Lewis described his younger self as "very angry with God for not
>> existing". Apparently when he discovered God he then channeled his
>> anger towards what he saw in Church on Sunday ("those who torment us
>> for our own good will torment us without end").
>>
>> And sure enough, in a rigged game with that pesky mortality always
>> playing in the background he finds plenty to agree. And disagree.
>
> Good an evil are human inventions. It has been a long time since I read
> C.S.Lewis. He did seem to have suffered the deeper implications of god
> and morality.
>
> If anyone that has read Lewis and hasn't read 'The Screwtape Letters', I
> highly recommend it...
I tried and couldn't finish. It's been a long while. I should try it
again. I liked Ayn Rand when I was 20, now I see what she has spawned
and its unsettling, to say the least.
> F.H. wrote:
>> Enrico Fermi wrote:
>
>>> "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims
>>> may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber
>>> barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's
>>> cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be
>>> satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us
>>> without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
>>> -- C.S. Lewis
>>
>> Lewis underestimates the all encompassing nature of greed. Genetics
>> suggests an endless supply of wannabe "robber barons" and history show
>> no record of any "satiation point."
>>
>> Lewis described his younger self as "very angry with God for not
>> existing". Apparently when he discovered God he then channeled his
>> anger towards what he saw in Church on Sunday ("those who torment us
>> for our own good will torment us without end").
>>
>> And sure enough, in a rigged game with that pesky mortality always
>> playing in the background he finds plenty to agree. And disagree.
>
> Good an evil are human inventions. It has been a long time since I read
> C.S.Lewis. He did seem to have suffered the deeper implications of god
> and morality.
>
> If anyone that has read Lewis and hasn't read 'The Screwtape Letters', I
> highly recommend it...
I tried and couldn't finish. It's been a long while. I should try it
again. I liked Ayn Rand when I was 20, now I see what she has spawned
and its unsettling, to say the least.
10-28-2007 | 06:37 PM
#75
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: (OT:) New Energy Sources... Was: Why do I have such a strongdislike for Ragheads?
Dan Bloomquist wrote:
> F.H. wrote:
>> Enrico Fermi wrote:
>
>>> "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims
>>> may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber
>>> barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's
>>> cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be
>>> satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us
>>> without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
>>> -- C.S. Lewis
>>
>> Lewis underestimates the all encompassing nature of greed. Genetics
>> suggests an endless supply of wannabe "robber barons" and history show
>> no record of any "satiation point."
>>
>> Lewis described his younger self as "very angry with God for not
>> existing". Apparently when he discovered God he then channeled his
>> anger towards what he saw in Church on Sunday ("those who torment us
>> for our own good will torment us without end").
>>
>> And sure enough, in a rigged game with that pesky mortality always
>> playing in the background he finds plenty to agree. And disagree.
>
> Good an evil are human inventions. It has been a long time since I read
> C.S.Lewis. He did seem to have suffered the deeper implications of god
> and morality.
>
> If anyone that has read Lewis and hasn't read 'The Screwtape Letters', I
> highly recommend it...
I tried and couldn't finish. It's been a long while. I should try it
again. I liked Ayn Rand when I was 20, now I see what she has spawned
and its unsettling, to say the least.
> F.H. wrote:
>> Enrico Fermi wrote:
>
>>> "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims
>>> may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber
>>> barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's
>>> cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be
>>> satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us
>>> without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."
>>> -- C.S. Lewis
>>
>> Lewis underestimates the all encompassing nature of greed. Genetics
>> suggests an endless supply of wannabe "robber barons" and history show
>> no record of any "satiation point."
>>
>> Lewis described his younger self as "very angry with God for not
>> existing". Apparently when he discovered God he then channeled his
>> anger towards what he saw in Church on Sunday ("those who torment us
>> for our own good will torment us without end").
>>
>> And sure enough, in a rigged game with that pesky mortality always
>> playing in the background he finds plenty to agree. And disagree.
>
> Good an evil are human inventions. It has been a long time since I read
> C.S.Lewis. He did seem to have suffered the deeper implications of god
> and morality.
>
> If anyone that has read Lewis and hasn't read 'The Screwtape Letters', I
> highly recommend it...
I tried and couldn't finish. It's been a long while. I should try it
again. I liked Ayn Rand when I was 20, now I see what she has spawned
and its unsettling, to say the least.