Kunstler makes a decent point.

Post #275,080 by Another Scott 12/7/06 1:23:29 PM Reply	Kunstler makes a decent point. [link\|http://www.kunstler.com/mags_diary19.html\|The Moral High Ground]: [...] White America has for many years dedicated itself to sucking up its own discomfort. When someone like Michael Richards blunders beyond the moral high ground and reveals the anger and resentment underneath this stoical mask of tolerance for "diversity," white America freaks out and rushes to anathemize it. White America does not want its discomfort to show, so it sucks up everything from the Tawana Brawley affair to the OJ Simpson verdict to the televised daily doings of Snoop and Fitty (which white children emulate as fun behavior). White America does not want racial conflict -- and understandably so -- and will humble itself to any extent to avoid it. To some degree, Hip-Hop is black America's reminder to white America that there are a lot of heavily armed and vicious young men out there who might call off their incessant partying and kick off a national scale gang war. This is white America's worst nightmare, much worse than Iraq, or global warming, or peak oil. This is also, by the way, the reason that white America idolizes Barack Obama. He is the first figure on the scene in thirty years who offers the promise of leading all of America back to the moral high ground. Rational Idealism in politics would be a really nice change. Cheers, Scott.
Post #275,082 by mmoffitt 12/7/06 2:00:19 PM Reply	s/Rational/Utopian More than twenty years ago a woman was on the ticket for Vice President (not the lead dog). Back then, that was too much for a good bit of Murica. I was astonished to hear how many people (particularly women) say things like, "I'd really like to vote for Mondale, but he's got that woman on the ticket. What if anything happens to him? I don't think we're ready for this." Pshaw, you say. That was 20 years ago. Do you really think that the overwhelming majority of voters - that'd be WASPS - have become so progressive in just two decades that now they not only could elect a woman as Vice President but could actually vote for a black man to be President? (I know, I know, he's mixed race, but he's perceived by many as Black). bcnu, Mikem It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
Post #275,084 by Another Scott 12/7/06 2:28:52 PM 12/8/06 5:20:12 PM Reply	It depends on who[m] he's running against. Major changes in politics have often occurred with someone who won by a whisker. I have little doubt that a race with Obama running would likely be close, but I don't think that it's out of the question that he could win. Remember that Clinton only beat Dole in the popular vote by 8.5 points in 1996. I think Obama could beat just about anyone on [link\|http://www.pollingreport.com/WH08rep.htm\|this] list. Giuliani has a lot of baggage, and McCain's let his "conservative" persona come to the fore. Cheers, Scott. Edited by Another Scott Dec. 8, 2006, 05:20:12 PM EST Expand All History
Post #275,179 by mmoffitt 12/8/06 2:10:26 PM Reply	Obama has no chance. And it would be an electoral landslide for his opponent whomever the opponent was. Pat Robertson could run against Obama and beat him. Wouldn't be close. See, you take a poll and white people don't want to admit that with the curtain drawn, they'd never be able to vote for a Black man for President, so they lie about it in the poll. They actually like to think they could vote for a Black man, but the truth is the overwhelming majority of them would pull the lever for the other guy when no one was looking. It's not just that I'm from the South that makes me say this. Some of the most disingenuous people on the subject of race I've ever met are from the North and Mid West. Obama might, might be able to carry California. And that's only because California is a white minority state. But even in California, I doubt SERIOUSLY Obama would win. All you have to do is look at Tom Bradley. No way he should have lost an election to the Dukester. But there it is. Bradley was a Black man running for Governor. If the Dem's really don't want to get the White House in 2008, Obama or Hillary will be their candidate. bcnu, Mikem It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
Post #275,198 by boxley 12/8/06 5:35:20 PM Reply	agreed thats why all the repo talking heads are pushing them I have it on good authority that Hannity prayer every night is "please give us one more chance, let hillary win the nomination." thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep reach me at [link\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
Post #275,211 by JayMehaffey 12/8/06 8:11:05 PM Reply	I don't think it is as bad as you say I don't think the racism situation is as bad as you say. I think Obama could be Robertson for instance, if Robertson where given a chance to rave in public about how everybody who doesn't agree with his specific type of Christianity is an evil devil follower. But I would agree that people who think it wouldn't be an issue or would help him overall are simply wrong. Obama's best shot right now is serving 8 years as VP first. Getting people used to seeing and hearing him will overcome the majority of the disadvantage being black brings him. Jay
Post #275,217 by boxley 12/8/06 9:17:04 PM Reply	ask some black folk His dad is from Africa, his mom white american. You might be surprised. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep reach me at [link\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
Post #275,706 by a6l6e6x 12/13/06 4:21:53 PM Reply	Having the middle name Hussein alone will finish him. Given the ignorance of the sheeple, can you picture the negative ads? Alex When fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. -- Sinclair Lewis
Post #275,709 by Another Scott 12/13/06 4:37:07 PM Reply	Well, there is that... :-/
Post #275,721 by tuberculosis 12/13/06 6:20:11 PM Reply	More to the point He has vowed to run a purely postive campaign - no attack ads, no negativity, plans to "rise above" any mud slinging. Sounds wonderful. Except that swiftboating works. [link\|http://www.blackbagops.net\|Black Bag Operations Log] [link\|http://www.objectiveclips.com\|Artificial Intelligence] [link\|http://www.badpage.info/seaside/html\|Scrutinizer]
Post #275,750 by Silverlock 12/13/06 11:25:53 PM Reply	Don't forget Obama rhymes with Osama. I think the guy is electable but don't want to argue it. I think that currently, almost any Democrat is electable. The reasons I think this are simple. 1. Iraq 2. Iraq 3. Iraq And then there's Iraq. C'mon, people realize they were scammed. They don't like being scammed. You've already seen some of the backlash in the last election wherein any seat that changed party was a gain for the Democrats. Not a single pickup for the Republicans. I will be vastly surprised if the Democrats don't win the next Presidential election. And a metric buttload more seats in congress. ----------------------------------------- Draft Kucinich [link\|http://www.kucinich.us/bio.php\|now].
Post #275,998 by mmoffitt 12/17/06 6:20:25 PM Reply	Good on ya. At my age, I am almost beyond surprise. Looks like you're still young enough to be surprised - and you will be, in 2008. ;0) bcnu, Mikem It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
Post #276,061 by Silverlock 12/18/06 7:39:43 AM Reply	I hope I never get that old It's my childlike sense of wonder that allows me to talk about the weather. Again. ----------------------------------------- Draft Kucinich [link\|http://www.kucinich.us/bio.php\|now].
Post #276,080 by mmoffitt 12/18/06 3:36:58 PM Reply	Ha! Just noticed your sig change. Excellent choice! I saw him on CSPAN. Another tilt at the windmills, but oh what fun! Certainly would make for the finest First Lady we've had since Rosalyn. And a Brit, too! bcnu, Mikem It would seem, therefore, that the three human impulses embodied in religion are fear, conceit, and hatred. The purpose of religion, one might say, is to give an air of respectibility to these passions. -- Bertrand Russell
Post #276,078 by Ashton 12/18/06 3:16:00 PM Reply	Here's your recipe script for___Surprise!! 1) It's (still...) a (complete) Mystery why anything is 'here'. At all. 2) There is (apparently..) Maxwell's Demon (for those who believe in statistics.) 3) There IS (assuredly) Cosmic Humour. (She's fond of the Brit speeling?) 4) Applying mathematical/logical ideas re causality to the jelloware imagineering of the species is (ImHO) a fool's errand - it's a conceit to imagine that we possess any skillz at the umm, extrapolation-of-events? Mix that all together and ya gets.. for just One example: But for the noir/brummagem side of Cosmic Humour.?. we almost "lost" The Berk / Shrub / Village Idiot ... ... to a pretzel!! Rest case. HTH, etc.
Post #275,190 by CRConrad 12/8/06 4:43:41 PM Reply	Whom, by the Great Rotating Rod! Here's a tip: Whenever you're in doubt about whether it should be "who" or "whom", just replace it with "he" or "him". Here, that (both variants) would look clumsy, because "who" is more flexible than "he" and works to tie two disparate sub-clauses together into a sentence in a way that "he" can't... but if we split it up into its constituent parts and do the replacement separately for each, then it works. So: "It depends on he", or "It depends on him"? "He's running against he", or "He's running against him"? In both cases, it's the version with the 'm' at the end that looks best, isn't it? And therefore, it should be the version of "who" that has an 'm' at the end, too: "It depends on whom he's running against." HTH! [link\|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode\|Christian R. Conrad] (I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.) Ah, the Germans: Masters of Convoluted Simplification. — [link\|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1603\|Jehovah]
Post #275,194 by Another Scott 12/8/06 5:19:52 PM Reply	Ack! Thanks! Cheers, Scott. (Who knew this stuff at one time, but has forgotten it due to lack of use.)
Post #275,258 by Ashton 12/9/06 4:05:36 AM Reply	Let's do ___ 'It's me!' Convoluted Simplifications LLC Div. Confounding Contradictions Gmbh But as to who(m) - I too never/rarely try to recollect the mechanical parsing rulez of eons back. "How does it scan" - isn't precise, but properly pulses 'all experience'. I'm sure I never 'memorized' all those blackboard parsing exercises; that's just manna for compulsive taxonomists. I must just remember the resultant engrams. I think !? Then too, if one recalls Subject/Object .. that correlates with the transitive or intransitive case of [the meaning of is.] But not so simply, with only one to Be extant. Espa\ufffdol is saner, with ser and estar to obviate most vagaries of Being.. stuff Here's a test of your eclectic amassing of English weirdage of the Ages - It is I, Digby O'Dell the {friendly} undertaker [1] -VS- It's me. I think there's no punctilious way to parse these, without separate verb-forms. I can ~take It's me, which is by now std. usage, I wot - but prefer, It is I. If you reverse the order, as one should be able to to do, in intransitive case: It is me <-> Me is it. -VS- It is I <-> I is it, though {sigh} you'd really say, I am it/I am that (-person) {ugh} Easier, when queried about a definite, Are you he? -- clearly you reply, I am he (not him) etc. Too many words! about a couple simple idioms. You're really not 'acting upon' the putative object here, ergo I aver that Engl. would be much saner with ser/estar. We. must. revise back to... beyond Beowulf. er, Maybe 'scan' Is the better working version. :-\ufffd [link\|http://www.old-time.com/bytes/index.html\| [1]] 2/3 way down list - and you can Hear them. Ghosts... Rilly too early for you, '40s radio - but then again.. The Shadow Knows BTW - that exact phrase in "" got 3 Google hits! (I have managed [1], a few times)
Post #275,262 by Another Scott 12/9/06 8:16:28 AM Reply	"Myself" seems to be replacing "me" and "I" these days. I cringe most times that I hear people saying "myself", because it seems wrong to my ears in almost all cases. But it seems to be working its way into popular American English as a single word to replace "me/I/" in cases where people have forgotten or never learned the traditional rules. E.g. Laura and I are going to the ethnic market to pick up some octopus, pig tongues, lamb lungs, and dripping fungus to make pot of stew. Do you want to come along? There's almost nothing better than home-made stew. Mmmm Good! Who's coming along with Laura and me? becomes *Laura and myself ... Who's coming along with Laura and myself?* </skin crawling> Cheers, Scott.
Post #275,268 by jbrabeck 12/9/06 10:41:27 AM Reply	You and Bio are doing what? :) A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort. (Herm Albright)
Post #275,274 by Another Scott 12/9/06 11:07:43 AM Reply	No, it doesn't involve jazz hands.
Post #275,312 by Ashton 12/9/06 9:28:00 PM Reply	Well.. 'ter' never caught on for 'him-or-her' - though the idea was intensely logic-al. May the same fate await the 'myself'marker. Proper usage: ? I (when myself) probably wouldn't have mistaken that blasting cap for a foil-wrapped caramel, you see. Alas, the President, clearly hurrying to a peace march, Decided to bite down before..
Post #275,085 by boxley 12/7/06 3:23:11 PM Reply	where is he from "To some degree, Hip-Hop is black America's reminder to white America that there are a lot of heavily armed and vicious young men out there who might call off their incessant partying and kick off a national scale gang war. This is white America's worst nightmare" dont think so, to dam many of them cant wait to get it started. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 51 years. meep reach me at [link\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net\|mailto:bill.oxley@cox.net]
Post #275,250 by drewk 12/9/06 1:37:19 AM Reply	Wow, that's a first I've never seen anyone disagree with Kunstler on the grounds that he wasn't sufficiently pessimistic. === Kip Hawley is still an idiot. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]
Post #275,256 by Andrew Grygus 12/9/06 2:40:06 AM Reply	From many years ago . . . . . a black leader's (I've forgotten which one) answer to the call for revolution, "What good would it do us to go bang! bang! when they'll go ratatatatatat! and Kaboom! Kaboom!?". [link\|http://www.aaxnet.com\|AAx]

Welcome to IWETHEY!