musingofamaasu Comments - Brought to you by JoeUserhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/rss/comments© 2006 - 2008 Stardock Corporation. All rights reserved.Whose more insane, me or the rest of society? Read the following blog of bollocks and decide for yourself.en-us2008-07-25T11:20:592008-07-25T11:20:59http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/rss/rss.htmlStardock Rss Generator v1.0, Andrew Powellinfo@stardock.comapowell@stardock.comstevendedalushttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317147
]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317147http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317147Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00stevendedalus on Where can i go for a good read?KFC Kickin For Christhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/318925You should have taken the bible and walked on.....there are still some things in life free and this would or could have given you a life changing experience. 

Glad everything is ok tho.  A wake up call perhaps? 

 

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/318925http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/318925Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00KFC Kickin For Christ on To taste fear.Daiwahttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500She can do one better than overrule parliament; she can dissolve it.
Man, what a concept! I could go for that.

Trouble is, I believe the monarch then has to form another one. Same here, so to speak... we have to keep electing these crackheads. ]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Daiwa on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.Dr Guyhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792but the tax excludes cars from 2001,

It still is going to kill the market for cars after that date, which they can do 2 things with. The government can buy them back (where is the money going to come from?) or they get sold at fire rate sale prices - and who is looking for a car cheap? Those that cannot afford anythign more. The year is arbitrary. In 2 years those cars are going to be 10 years old. Time does not stop just because of some arbitrary ink on a piece of paper.

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Dr Guy on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly VehiclesTexas Wahinehttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792This is not some theory. It is reality. The people driving the gas guzzlers in the states are poor. Why? because they cannot afford the initial price for a $20k "economy" car, but can afford $1k for an old clunker.

I would love to see stats on that. Maybe it's different where you live, but around here it's pretty rare to see "an old clunker".

The SUVs I see are late model, and often high-end. I also see TONS and TONS of enormous pick up trucks. Not old clunkers. Shiny, tricked out late model trucks.

A lot of these vehicles don't even start at $20k for a base model.

if they were really serious why not make the tax $1000 or $2000, but just $100 more, most will tolerate that.


That's a good point. Even though an extra tax sucks, it would have to be substantial to make it to us to trade in our vehicle and purchase a different one.

We had to pay over $300 to the state of Texas for our vehicle we purchased in HI when we moved back to Texas. I think we're getting used to an extra $100 here and an extra $200 there. Ugh.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Texas Wahine on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly VehiclesDr Guyhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792I think your slightly confused here Dr Guy, we are saying tax anyone (apart from large families, as they need large cars) who has a car that uses a lot of gas.

No, I am not confused, you are just buying the hype, not the reality. A poor person does not have choices. Since the cost of large cars has just been taxed, it will make them uneconomical to most people that have choices. So they will be dumped (at very low prices - a concept that is tantamount to seizure by the government).

Since the poor do not have choices, they will buy them. Smaller cars will be out of their reach as they sky rocket in price. Of course the poor cant pay the taxes either, so they will be granted relief. In other words, they will be given money to pay the taxes. And where is the money coming from?

Those who do pay taxes.

This is not some theory. It is reality. The people driving the gas guzzlers in the states are poor. Why? because they cannot afford the initial price for a $20k "economy" car, but can afford $1k for an old clunker.

It is more economical to buy a non-taxed car - if you have the money up front. And the poor do not. They have to take what they can get - beggars cant be choosy.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Dr Guy on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly VehiclesDr Guyhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Obama has more in common with the Copperhead-Democrats mentioned above.

Seems democrats have not changed in 140 years.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Dr Guy on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Dr Guyhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500She can do one better than overrule parliament; she can dissolve it.

With a congress rating of 9%, a lot of americans envy that power. ]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Dr Guy on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.cactoblastahttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Does the monarch have authority to overrule (veto) Parliament? Been awhile since I focused on that (say 40 years) but I don't think so.

She can do one better than overrule parliament; she can dissolve it. As you can probably imagine, it's not a power that gets much use. She wielded it in Australia in 1975 through the Governor-General, John Kerr. I'm not sure when it was last used in Great Britain proper.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00cactoblasta on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.Leaukihttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916
Lincoln was a pro-war Republican. Obama has more in common with the Copperhead-Democrats mentioned above.
]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Leauki on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Nitro Cruiserhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792It's a scheme to make money. if they were really serious why not make the tax $1000 or $2000, but just $100 more, most will tolerate that. It's like cigarettes in the US, the government taxes the hell out of them, but they really don't want it to go away because it is a huge cash cow. Don't worry your government knows exactly what they are doing. The real problem here is you (and other environmentally concerned people like you) believe they have your best interest at heart, so it's a win - win for them.

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Nitro Cruiser on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly Vehicleslittle-whiphttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916
"My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it"

"Negroes have natural rights, however, as other men have, although they cannot enjoy them here . . . no sane man will attempt to deny that the African upon his own soil has all the natural rights that instrument vouchsafes to all mankind."

"I have no purpose to produce political and social equality. I am not in favor of making voters or judges of negroes or qualifying them to hold office or of allowing them to intermarry with white people."

"Judge Douglas has said to you that he has not been able to get from me an answer to the question whether I am in favor of Negro citizenship. . . . I tell him very frankly that I am not in favor of Negro citizenship"

."There is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will for ever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race"

"We must not disturb slavery in the states where it exists, because the constitution, and the peace of the country, both forbid us"

"Negro Equality! Fudge!! How long in the government of a God, great enough to make and maintain this Universe, shall there continue knaves to vend, and fools to gulp, so low a piece of demagoguism as this!"

"You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly,many of them living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this is admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated."

(*From various sources, check them out yourself if you think these are in error.)

Since B.Hussein Obama attended a racist and separatist church for twenty years, perhaps he IS more like Lincoln than we give him credit for, hahah.





]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00little-whip on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Dr Guyhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792
The Rich dont have to pay by virtue of their choices. And an extra few bucks is not going to impact them anyway. The Middle class will opt out and get rid of those vehicles. And who will buy them? The people with no choices (they will be cheaper by virtue of the government's tax). But they cannot pay the tax, so the government will subsidize them. Now government does not "make" anything. They can break anything, but they make nothing. SO what do they do? Take the money from the rich and give it to the poor so the poor can then afford the gas guzzlers.

It is just a new way to take money from wage earners and give it to non-productive people and buy votes.

An honest (but will never be done) approach is to simply ban those type of vehicles and melt them down. It will take time, but is more honest than creating a new tax on the rich and calling it a silk purse.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Dr Guy on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly VehiclesLeaukihttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916
"During the American Civil War, the Copperheads nominally favored the Union and strongly opposed the war, for which they blamed abolitionists, and they demanded immediate peace and resisted draft laws. They wanted Lincoln and the Republicans ousted from power, seeing the president as a tyrant who was destroying American republican values with his despotic and arbitrary actions."

"Some Copperheads tried to persuade Union soldiers to desert. They talked of helping Confederate prisoners of war seize their camps and escape. They sometimes met with Confederate agents and took money. The Confederacy encouraged their activities whenever possible."

"The Copperheads sometimes talked of violent resistance, and in some cases started to organize. They never actually made an organized attack, though. As war opponents, Copperheads were suspected of disloyalty, and Lincoln often had their leaders arrested and held for months in military prisons without trial"

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Leauki on I don't think America is ready for a black president.CharlesCShttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792I think that's quite an assumption. Lots of lower-middle income families drive SUVs. They're certainly not "rich" people. It is only appropriate to own a larger vehicle if you are wealthy?

That's why I said "SUVs, well they are expensive as well but I'm sure some poor people could acquire them". There are good pluses (as in your case) where an SUV (which can be expensive) is worth the cost, even for a low income family. It's not about a larger vehicle being only for the wealthy but the fact that they can be expensive and gas guzzling that it's not something your average poor person should be driving. It's the reason I got rid of my Explorer and my wife's as well and got the smaller more gas economical car we currently have that I made an article about.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00CharlesCS on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly VehiclesMasonMhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00MasonM on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly VehiclesSodaihohttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792This may be a situation where the market corrects itself. Sooner or later, more likely sooner (of late), big gas consuming cars/SUVs/trucks will be seen as wasteful in the extreme and no longer economically viable.  I know it didn't take me long to dump my truck in exchange for a far more economical Honda Fit.  So, maybe this is a tax revenue move!

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Sodaiho on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly VehiclesPaladin77http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Precisely my point, just more eloquently put.

I highly respect you and reading this is an honor to me. Thank you very much.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Paladin77 on I don't think America is ready for a black president.little-whiphttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916As long as they vote liberal they are “good Negros” but when they get uppity and think outside the party line they are traitors to the party and their race.

Precisely my point, just more eloquently put.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00little-whip on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Texas Wahinehttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Still this would be hurting people that should not have these vehicles in the first place since technically they should not be able to afford them.

I think that's quite an assumption. Lots of lower-middle income families drive SUVs. They're certainly not "rich" people. It is only appropriate to own a larger vehicle if you are wealthy?]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Texas Wahine on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly VehiclesTexas Wahinehttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792
We're in the US, so obviously this is just hypothetical, but this new tax would hurt us even though, in total, we use a lot less fuel than a lot of other families (2 cars, lots of driving).

What would the UK have families switch to? A fuel efficient CAR is not going to have the space capacity to transport my family. A minivan gets a little better gas mileage (good enough to avoid the tax?), but we are not in a position to trade in our vehicle for something else. It would be cheaper to keep our gas-guzzler and pay the tax.

How would you suggest lower income families switch to a more fuel efficient vehicle? Where is this magical money going to come from that's going to allow them to do that? What type of vehicle should a family with more than 4 or 5 members drive (and remember, you've got car seats and strollers and backpacks and other gear that has to fit as well)?

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Texas Wahine on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly VehiclesCharlesCShttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792
I do agree this could be more for raising revenue. From what I have seen, like most businesses, the Gov't is very smart at finding ways to offset taxes they give back to people or take more from them in some other way.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00CharlesCS on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly VehiclesCharlesCShttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792new government bill that is being passed that will specifically target vehicles that use a lot of petrol (or gas) per mile.

Does this refer to vehicles that by design consume a lot of gas (say for example sports cars and SUVs) or vehicles that are not maintained properly and consume more gas than they should? Or both?]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00CharlesCS on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly Vehiclesshallhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792If low-income families were given a bit of help, maybe an additional one-time tax credit or something (I'm not from Europe and am largely ignorant of how things work there), I think many of them would be interested in getting a vehicle that was more environmentally friendly and less expensive to operate.

But telling a poor fellow to buy a new car or suffer a tax increase seems a little unreasonable. If someone is hurting financially, it's going to look like a rock and a hard place.

That said, I understand the reasoning behind this idea -- people listen when you talk about taxes, and someone otherwise unconcerned with the environment would be pretty quick to pay attention and switch to a better vehicle.

Anyway, I have to wonder what happens to the older and/or less fuel-efficient vehicles. Whatever it is, I'm betting it might not be good for the environment either. Or cheap. But I have no idea. Interesting things to think about.

I suppose in some places in Europe, public transportation is a workable option. That might help poorer families somewhat. In the U.S., public transit isn't possible for everyone, so it would result in a huge outcry regardless of the details.

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317792Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00shall on Taxation of Environmentally Unfriendly VehiclesDaiwahttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500there is a royal family instead of a president
I think that would be a PM instead of a President, wouldn't it? Does the monarch have authority to overrule (veto) Parliament? Been awhile since I focused on that (say 40 years) but I don't think so.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Daiwa on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.Dr Guyhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500The theoretical advantage

Dont forget the real advantages - you get the Queen's birthday as a holiday too. ]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Dr Guy on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.cactoblastahttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500In a republic we elect representatives that will vote on these issues. Both of our governments are democratic republics.

Not quite - the UK is a constitutional monarchy, not a republic. It's different, mainly in that there is a royal family instead of a president. The theoretical advantage is that a single person doesn't have a great deal of power, but in practice a prime minister is vastly more powerful than a president if he can keep his party in line.

It's interesting the way it affects the media. With a royal family to stalk, there's slightly less criticism of the actual holders of power. Not a great deal less, but with such a soft target most of the cheaper press tend to go for the royals first, political figures second.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00cactoblasta on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.Paladin77http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Very true. A bigot is one who puts race above the person. That is classic liberals of today. They only see race, not the person. The KKK did not go away, they just changed tactics - and still have their own man in the senate.

More than one and not just men.

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Paladin77 on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Dr Guyhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916As long as they vote liberal they are “good Negros” but when they get uppity and think outside the party line they are traitors to the party and their race.

Very true. A bigot is one who puts race above the person. That is classic liberals of today. They only see race, not the person. The KKK did not go away, they just changed tactics - and still have their own man in the senate.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Dr Guy on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Paladin77http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Sure, but the fact that you are a republic doesn't neccisarily mean you do not practice a representative form of democracy.

Please allow me to clear things up a bit.
In a democracy everyone votes on every issue that the government does.
In a republic we elect representatives that will vote on these issues. Both of our governments are democratic republics.

My point is that we are no longer in the era of divine right, and that even if its just in theory, the (re)public choose itself whom governs it.


YES!

On a side note, i was raised in North East England, an area devestated under Tory leadership. So their not my favourite party, to say the least, that isn't to say that they haven't come along way since those days.


Yes, but each side has evolved to the point that they should just switch names if you could forget the history you might notice that the Tories are not the hateful people they used to be.

We had the same thing happen in the States. In the 1800’s republicans were the radical liberals and democrats were the conservatives. That is how Lincoln got elected because he was liberal. Over time liberals acted like conservatives and conservatives acted like liberals now the democrats are the liberals with the same views they had as conservatives and republicans are the conservatives with the same views they had as liberals. The names have changed but the goals and ideas have not. I believe that has happened in your great nation as well.

i remember in my student days of hearing of stories of people throwing their TV out of the window when the inland revenue came a knocking


Okay for those that don’t have a clue what we are talking about. In the UK they have a tax on television ownership. Every year Inland Revenue comes around and checks who has a television and they pay as much as 100 pounds to use their television each year. I am not sure of the actual taxes and doing this from memory several decades old. Our cousin can correct me where I stray. In America if they try that there would be a second American revolution! ]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Paladin77 on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.Paladin77http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/3169161) If I'm such a bigot, why would I have voted for Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice if either of them had chosen to seek the Republican nomination?

LW, they are not black they are race traitors! If you sit with a liberal long enough face to face that will be what you will walk away with after the argument if you listen carefully enough. If you remember the term race traitor is a term used by white supremacists. As long as they vote liberal they are “good Negros” but when they get uppity and think outside the party line they are traitors to the party and their race. Since the Senator is still a liberal and will do their bidding he is a good Negro. I remember a liberal telling a joke to another liberal when he thought I could not hear them. What do you call a Negro doctor? Ni---r! That was the last time I went to a democratic function in New York. Some time later I left the democrat party. Since I have been with the racist, bigoted, homophobic, intolerants of the Republican Party I have not heard such talk. Never had I heard even mild racial jokes. Sure there are the jokes about terrorist, and liberals but none that attack a person or their religion, with the exception of the religion of global warming.

In their mindless minds they honestly believe that if you don’t vote for the Senator then you are a racist but there are many in their party that will not vote for the Senator because of his race. They are not racists they just wanted Hillary. A good excuse but not a truthful one.

They aren't 'black enough' for ya? If that's the case, B. Hussein Obama should suffer the same judgement because he's half white.


No, that’s different because he is their half white candidate. When General Powel had kept his political leanings private he was a wonderful person. As soon as he announced that he was a republican the knives came out, the attacks did not stop until he left the Bush Administration. As long as he criticized the administration he was a good Negro. Doctor Rice has been called all manner of things. They attacked her because she was a woman, so much for equal rights for women. She was attacked because she is black, so much for racial equality. The liberal democrats have a scorched earth strategy, nothing is left when they attack because all is fair in politics, even racism and sexism.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Paladin77 on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Leaukihttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916
why would I have voted for Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice


I don't care how much it hurts liberals to face this reality, but I too would gladly vote for Colin Powell or Condoleezza Rice. They are both competent and resourceful politicians, as honest as can be, and their skin colour has nothing to do with that (except in the sense that they have to take a lot of crap from liberals because they are black Republicans and presumably grew as human beings because of it).

(A white anti-war Democrat afraid of black Republicans. It's the 1870s all over again.)
]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Leauki on I don't think America is ready for a black president.little-whiphttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916The fact remains bigots oppose Obama, AMERCANS support him.

1) If I'm such a bigot, why would I have voted for Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice if either of them had chosen to seek the Republican nomination? They aren't 'black enough' for ya? If that's the case, B. Hussein Obama should suffer the same judgement because he's half white.

2) I am an American by birth and no one can take that away, dickhead. Even if I voted for a nazi or communist candidate I'd still be an American. So neener-neener-neener.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00little-whip on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Paladin77http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500I would contend it is the mainstream media that have been doing the pretending about neutrality for decades; I don't think Fox News would exist were that not the case.

I agree with you here. I don’t see Fox News being blatant about where they stand. Rather than club you over the head with their views they just tell it like it is and let you believe what you want. That is the selling point for Fox. Keep in mind they only have access to 2 million people while the other networks have access to over 300 million people and fox has higher ratings. ]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Paladin77 on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.Paladin77http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916It was also somewhat proven out in the Kentucky and West Virginia elections, when I believe soemthing like 20% of voters voted against Obama based on Race. What does that mean, you might say, my state isn't 'racist' per se? I would say that West Virginians and Kentuckians are more willing to speak out on their beliefs than some.

I find it interesting that you say that your state is not racist but then you mention other states are more willing to speak their minds. This suggests to me that you believe race is a factor in your state but no one will admit it. That is a dishonest state in my view.

Hell, I know, since we are talking experience, then perhaps we should have a Bush or Clinton in the White House for, oh I don't know, the next 100 years or so, that will solve everything!


I would have been happy if neither was president at all and their families stayed out of politics.

You are right about the experience thing. it is a straw man argument, that I have started in the past without thinking. The only people experienced in being president of the United States are presidents. Everyone else is looking for the job and hopes they are up to the task. When President Bush was tested by China at the start of his presidency I was worried. But the way he handled it told me that there was a lot beneath the surface, and any jerk that messed with us was in deep trouble. I was right. This is why I have doubts about Senator Obama. He reminds me of a corporal I had once. This guy talked the talk all the time. As soon as he saw his first headless body that used to share his room he puked and could not handle the pressure for days. He bounced back but the time he needed to recover was way too long. I fear the same with the good Senator. We get an attack like what China did and he might fold, we get an attack like 9/11 and he looks as if he will curl up in the fetal position sucking his thumb for a day or two. His Vice and his staff had better be ready to pick up the slack because if an enemy sees any weakness we will have a long indecisive war on our hands. The next president will be tested by China and Russia while at the same time we will be dealing with the war. Not a situation you want someone to deal with when all they want is to be president but have no ideas as to how to lead the nation.
]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Paladin77 on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Daiwahttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500
Newsweek has seen its readership plummet & fired seemingly half its staff. Their newest hire? Karl Rove.

Nancy dis-Grace is an outlier so she doesn't count, but there's Beck on CNN.

What we've traditionally called the "MSM" are going to have to become more balanced in the delivery of their product in order to survive. Fox "News" is largely fair & balanced. Fox News Channel "Commentary" is also largely balanced, though less so, but it is anything be a wolf in sheep's clothing - there is no mistaking their bias. I would contend it is the mainstream media that have been doing the pretending about neutrality for decades; I don't think Fox News would exist were that not the case.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Daiwa on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.relswickhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916I made a similiar prediction back in January when Edwards dropped out of the race.  You can see it here.

It was also somewhat proven out in the Kentucky and West Virginia elections, when I believe soemthing like 20% of voters voted against Obama based on Race.  What does that mean, you might say, my state isn't 'racist' per se?  I would say that West Virginians and Kentuckians are more willing to speak out on their beliefs than some.

Hell, I know, since we are talking experience, then perhaps we should have a Bush or Clinton in the White House for, oh I don't know, the next 100 years or so, that will solve everything!  Sorry, no one is truely ready for the job of being the President of the United States, are they?  It is sort of like having kids, where you really are not ready for everything that it entails.  Just how it is.

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00relswick on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Paladin77http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916The fact remains bigots oppose Obama, AMERCANS support him.

I take exception to your statement. I am not for Senator Obama. He has not shown me that he can handle being president of these United States. He’s just too colored for me, and I need a president that will work for all the people not just the race baiters. He gets the votes because he is black and little else.

Senator Obama has a law degree, that if fine if I want laws written so no one can understand them. President Bush has an MBA, that is not a degree that is given lightly, since most of my peers have this degree including my son. The other half of my peers has law degrees so I understand what we are getting with a lawyer as president. This country is made up of people trying to live the American dream not some socialized nightmare. Business is what makes America work and if you hurt business you hurt people. The good Senator has not shown that he understands business in any way shape or form.

Actually you are not voting for Obama because you are an unintelligent low moraled buffoon who got your panties in a knot because he dared win while you were pretending to be a Democratic Hillary Clinton supporter.

Then when Hillary lost thinking for yourself became too difficult and you went back to sniveling about how you preferred the party who looks to keep you pregnant barefoot and in the kitchen.


I am sensing some unresolved anger here. I think you need a time out for a nap. What you wrote was rude and uncalled for. If you disagree with someone tell them why, launching into mean spirited attacks is not going to win you any friends.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Paladin77 on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Paladin77http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Many consider democracy the final form of goverement, that it is the most evolved and sophisticated form of how a society should distribute its power and decisions.
While democracy as a notition is very sound and more importantly noble, being a democractic country doesn't neccisarily remove you the issue of corruption of power. What it doesn't addres is the issue of how those whom vote form their opinions.

Sir, I must take issue with you here. First America is different from the UK in many ways. The most important is that America is a republic not a democracy, wait you have a representative government as well don’t you? One of your ministers is a former customer of mine. I sold him a house in Florida. We had some great discussions on the differences between our two countries. Grant it I have only spoken to one MP but he seemed good enough for a Tory. Hoped I spelled that correctly.

Second is that the press is protected by the constitution of the US, this is not the case in the UK. Your laws allow your government to shut down any news organization at will. This is against the law in America. The BBC is an arm of your government though held at arms length. We have something similar called PBS.

Fox news has only one dedicated news show. It is called “Special Report” it shows the news unbiased. It has commentary of the news at the end of the show. The host or as you call them the presenter does not offer political comment during this commentary. They have on liberal and one conservative and alternate each day with either and extra conservative or liberal. They present their opinions and we are to decide which one to believe or side with.

The one instance you brought up was one I did not see. But for Public Relations they would be silly to retract that comment so quickly. It makes them look good.

To the person that said the Scotteh did not bring up CBS or other liberal media, it may be because he does not get those shows. Last time I was in the UK they only had 4 channels. BBC 1 through 4 I am sure they have more now but they are still controlled by the government. Do they still have a TV tax?

In the UK they have strict laws for presenters, we call them anchormen or hosts, and they are not allowed any comment on the news good or bad. For our cousin across the pond the fact that anyone on a news program stating opinion is criminal because in his country it is criminal.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Paladin77 on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.dynamasohttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317482
That authorities see scrutiny of the bible as questionable is questionable in itself. The bible is a subjective document anyway, cobbled together from various individual accounts and subjectively selected according to which stories church authorities at the time thought correct.

Good article...]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317482http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317482Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00dynamaso on Thou shall not question nor think!little-whiphttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317482Religion sucks.

God's ok, though.  All the Gods.  The Gods are dead.  Long live the Gods.

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317482http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/317482Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00little-whip on Thou shall not question nor think!Island Doghttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500
I don't spend much time watching fox anymore, i spent a good while watching clips of it during my research for this article however and one that was apparent (and recent) was it's report on China drilling in Cuba for oil underneath Florida.


Where exactly did you view these clips?  YouTube, Moveon.org, DailyKooks?  You admit you really don't watch Fox News, but you are somehow knowledgable enough to claim they would be considered a criminal organization.  How ridiculous.

 

 

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Island Dog on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.little-whiphttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00little-whip on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Daiwahttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500
What about Nova M? Should they also be considered a criminal organization in your "ideal" world? There's not even a claim of fair & balanced there.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Daiwa on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.Nitro Cruiserhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Check this out.

link

There are more Democrats than Republicans in the US, that's a fact. Now I wactch many different news media outlets and do find most lean (in various degrees) to the left. With the exption of FOX. So why is FOX news more popular than the others? Maybe Indepenteds are wary of the gushing by some reporters over Obama, the lack of good news in Iraq, and the sky is falling syndrome to name a few.

Link

 

]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316500Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Nitro Cruiser on In an ideal world Fox News would be considered a criminal organisation.Dr Guyhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Reply #32
textwing

If you are representative of Obamabots, then he has lost. Not everyone who may vote for him is a mindless automaton, and a little understanding of the real issues and differences they have with him will go a long way in gaining their vote. Idiotic childish name calling and school yard taunts will just make them stay home or vote for the more adult candidate.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Dr Guy on I don't think America is ready for a black president.little-whiphttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916The fact remains bigots oppose Obama, AMERCANS support him.

Call me what you like, I'm still not voting for Obama.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00little-whip on I don't think America is ready for a black president.MasonMhttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Actually you are not voting for Obama because you are an unintelligent low moraled buffoon who got your panties in a knot because he dared win while you were pretending to be a Democratic Hillary Clinton supporter.

Then when Hillary lost thinking for yourself became too difficult and you went back to sniveling about how you preferred the party who looks to keep you pregnant barefoot and in the kitchen.

Wow you really are a completely immature, moronic, asshat aren't you? Are you even capable of writing anything intelligent? Are childish insults and hyperbole all you have to offer? What a sorry piece of crap excuse for a person.

The truth is Obama lacks any real experience in national or international politics and is far too left wing to make a good president. Perhaps with a few years of experience and more maturity (something you are seriously lacking) he might make a decent president. But not now.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00MasonM on I don't think America is ready for a black president.Locamamahttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Actually you are not voting for Obama because you are an unintelligent low moraled buffoon who got your panties in a knot because he dared win while you were pretending to be a Democratic Hillary Clinton supporter.

Then when Hillary lost thinking for yourself became too difficult and you went back to sniveling about how you preferred the party who looks to keep you pregnant barefoot and in the kitchen.

yeah, that's it. rolls eyes. My panties are just finek, thanks. Hillary won 18 million votes and I am not alone in my beliefs that Obama is not qualified or experienced enough to lead our country.

So the Obamabots who can't even admit he has ever did something wrong are the ones thinking for themselves - I think not.

Oh and the barefoot and pregnant remark barely deserves a response but I think you'll find that Obama is hardly the defender of women's rights that he pretends to be now that he wants our votes. ]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00Locamama on I don't think America is ready for a black president.textwinghttp://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916not voting for Obama because I think he is inexperienced, unqualified

Actually you are not voting for Obama because you are an unintelligent low moraled buffoon who got your panties in a knot because he dared win while you were pretending to be a Democratic Hillary Clinton supporter.

Then when Hillary lost thinking for yourself became too difficult and you went back to sniveling about how you preferred the party who looks to keep you pregnant barefoot and in the kitchen.]]>http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916http://musingofamaasu.joeuser.com/article/316916Fri, 25 Jul 2008 07:21:00 -04002008-07-25T11:21:00textwing on I don't think America is ready for a black president.