uncle wilco

Just a thought - it's the sort of thing I think of when I pass by this group of people every morning who are waiting for the hang-out room to open, so they can hang-out there all day. I think the city should put them to work picking up garbage and painting things. Of course, many of them don't want to work. I am around some of the projects that came out of the WPA everyday - so I see the good in it.

it wasn't my intention at all to make light of the homeless. that's not where i'm coming from at all. certainly there will always be a need in that area. i just don't see that a program on a TVA scale as necessary unless there was some grand vision of national necessity. certainly after WWII, those types of projects served a purpose, but now? i don't know about that.

but, like i said, if washington is going to keep encouraging these increased gas prices by inaction, maybe the "grand vision" could go from new highways and bridges to mass public transit and start the whole big brother/orwell ball rolling. always wondered what fritz lang's "metropolis" would be like in real life. i mean, isn't that where we are all heading for anyway? so, why stop it? (sarcasm)

I was thinking the other day - I wonder if Obama has any sort of plans to propose something like the WPA or CCC - I would like to see that happen.

sure, but only if the project was for light rail in every city with a steep incline followed by triple loops every 5-10 miles. if they are gonna screw us on gas to make us give up our vehicles and commute to work on a train every day, they better make it fun dammitt!

maybe they could start an organization to train and employ balloon animal-making clowns that could entertain the kids while we take a number and wait in line to sit in the waiting rooms, where we (again) wait some more to have our kids sit in gowns on butcher paper (where they can draw with crayons) waiting for our national healthcare designated nurse practioners to consult via video conference with a doctor in india over what prescription to prescribe. it's the least they could do.

Seven points to Betty White's team. The next password is "TV Guide."

yesssssss....[terrorist fist bump]...betty, you're the bomb...

Go screw.....

...yourself?

you're right that there's nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree, and i then went on and tried to change your mind, which i'm sorry for. (plus it's exhausting!)

sorry for the prolonged back and forth. there will always be opposing view points no matter the issue(s), we all have our reasons for believeing what we do and there's certainly nothing wrong with that. sometimes i fall back into debate for debate's sake, while knowing that nothing is going to come of it.

hope you have a good day.

In case you hadn't noticed, this is thread is a tribute to the late George Carlin. If you want to talk about your favorite comedians, start your own thread.

thanks, but no thanks. i was merely commenting on the seemingly endless coverage on tv last week. sorry, i guess a carlin thread wasn't the place for it.

my apologies.

we'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

 

nothing wrong with that.

 

i think your view of obama is one i can turn on fox news and hear every day, and we all know how "balanced" their viewpoint is. it's very distorted and leaves out a great deal of substance, which you have convinced me you don't want to even consider, let alone see.

 

thanks for putting me in the "fox news" box. i don't care for obama, therefore i must watch that channel exclusively. never mind those conservatives who are capable of forming their own opinions, because they can't really exist. i mean, if you don't subscribe to the liberal point of view, what other point of view is there?

 

and i'm still waiting for the answer as to the substance you are basing your faith in his "obamaness." or is just the knowledge that he's not bush or a republican all you need for assurance that he will grant all your wishes for a better government. because we all know that democrats make all our dreams come true. it's a wonder that they haven't had a continuous hold on the white house since FDR. oh, what could have been...(i don't know why i bother with sarcasm because democrats feel that way anyway).

 

but also, based on many of your posts, i know you're no fan of bush nor of the semi-clone running to take his place either. if you find the prospect of a mccain presidency extremely alarming, which i do, i hope you think long and hard before entering the voting booth.

 

i have thought long and hard and am still considering a vote for a 3rd party candidate (not named nader).

 

yes, i'll take obama any day.

 

why?

 

i'd take elmer fudd over mccain,

 

really?

 

but obama is a major cut above fudd,

 

based on what?

 

so despite a few not-unexpected disappointments because he's a politician, he's the guy.

 

yes, he's A guy, but what makes him your guy? what has he actually done to give you such confidence? because myself and half the country believe he's just a guy in an empty suit ready to tickle our ears with sweet nothingness.

 

and we didn't have to watch fox news to figure that out.

are we done canonizing george carlin now?

george was alright, but...come on....

i was a bigger richard pryor fan.

you sounded a bit like you were ready for the u.s. to attack iran. very soon.

 

i think that an airstrike of the nuclear sites by israel is justified but i don't agree with a ground invasion of iran. i don't understand the reasoning behind that one at all.

 

of the choices we have to pick from in november, you bet i think obama is the guy to do a better a job at diplomacy -- way better than what we have

now, and way better than we'd have with mcbush.

 

based on what?...hope?...change? obama has shown himself to be a bumbling goof at times. his speeches are vacuous exercises in nothingness, his convictions change depending on his audience and his lack of experience shows like his fly is perpetually open. sorry, i have absolutely no confidence in this man whatsoever and i'm certainly not alone in feeling that way. i'm sure world leaders everywhere are salivating at the prospect of a u.s. president ripe to be pushed around.

Ah, that oldie but goodie, the classic chestnut...but CLinton did it. When all else fails blame wild bill, its so much easier than thinking.

ah, hell...i just threw that out there. after 8 years of dubya, i kind of miss that guy.

u.w., although i've discovered that i agree with you at times, i am mighty glad you're not in d.c. with your finger on that button.

 

what button?, the nuclear button? i never called for that and i wouldn't. that's a bit extreme, dont you think?

 

we need a new and intelligent negotiator (and not simply a "decider"). then diplomacy will at least have a shot.

 

if you say barack is the guy to do this i'm going to scream...with laughter....

Do you think that it is okay to attack a nation without first attempting diplomacy?:

no, i don't. there has been ongoing negotiations with iran over the last few years and nothing has come of it. meanwhile, their nuclear program continues to advance.

Okay, but bombing supposed nuclear sites is still an unnecessary, unprevoked military attack. It's an immoral and corrupt policy.

i'm sure that they wouldn't make the mistake of bombing any aspirin or baby formula factories.

But part the reason that Iran hates Israel is because Israel and the United States are constantly threatening them and seem credible in that threat. Regardless, it's batshit insane to propose attacking a country that does not have nuclear weapons and is no actual threat to our security. A policy of attacking any country that defies our orders, no matter how big of a threat they actually are, is inexcusable warmongering. And we've given them every reason to defy our orders by presenting situations in which defying us looks to them to be to their direct benefit.

i would think that washington would support israel's right to strike the iran nuke sites if they deemed it necessary. then we would back them up however necessary. but i wouldn't expect a full out invasion of iraq. i don't see why that would even be necessary.

I don't give Ahmadinejad more sway than McCain or anything. I just prefer peaceful solutions and attempts to understand the other side's our enemy's position over bombing the hell out of another country that isn't really a threat to us. I think it's worth a shot.

all other points aside, the whole thing with iran is quite a bit different than a country like north korea. i would think it would be harder to negotiate with a country that is fueled by hatred of the mere existence of israel and of the nations who support them. it's a deep-seated hatred that doesn't exist with a communist country like north korea. it is much, much deeper than that.

kind of like having a "war on terror". it's a war vs. a religious ideology that is not easily diffused with negotiations. certainly worth the effort, but so far it's not been met with any success as iran continues to refuse to cooperate. how much longer can we wait until they reach their nuclear objective?

It was mistranslation that's been discredited several times, uttered by a guy who has no power to go to war, but believe whatever you want.

i call bullshit on the mistranslation claim. he's made several long-winded statements regarding israel's impending demise on several occasions. so you are saying he's somehow managed to fool the entire mainstream press, and the whole EU, not to mention israel itself each time he spewed this b.s.? really?

you'd think a more credible source besides huffpo (freaking huffpo?...puhleez..ha..ha..) and a few left wing parrot blogs would have uncovered this "mistranslation" and exposed the sinister "invade iran" bush plot that dubya has so ingeniusly concocted.

i think ahmadinejad would be in need of a better press agent to be this misunderstood for this long by the entire world...except for the liberal democrats, of course.

how come dirtbag heads of state get more sway with the liberal crowd than the opposing political party of our own country? it's pretty pathetic really.

Most other countries in the Middle East view the very existence of Israel as a taunt.

Most other countries in the World view the very existence of the United States as a taunt.

screw 'em. they aren't owed an apology for their existence.

I don't blame Israel for wanting to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons. I also don't blame Iran for thinking that they need to have some insurance against Israel attacking them.

well, for an oil rich country to be dabbling in nukes (for energy purposes?...umm, sure...ok) to begin with and then calling israel a "stinking corpse" and saying they want to "wipe them off the map" is a pretty big red flag. iran put the bullseye on themselves by running off at the mouth. i don't recall israel taunting iran and starting all this.

is there really any doubt as to the outcome on 'ole vc?

Sorry, but I do not blame Israel one little bit for doing whatever it can to deny Iran nuclear weapons.

me neither.

Really? If McCain wins, you think the GOP would try to sabotage him in 2012? Or do you think McCain would decline to seek re-election?

i don't see him running again and he's hinted at going for just one term as well. but, you never know.

thing is, mccain was not the choice of many in the GOP and he would be a prime candidate to be challenged within his own party if he chose to continue. not to bring age into it, but the man would be 72 entering his first term and 76 entering a second. seems hard to imagine he'd want to continue.

In general I would agree, but this does seem to deprive the GOP of a major talking point, and could make it difficult to energize a portion of their base.

i'm thinking there are alot of other reasons for the GOP to energize their base...starting with the likelyhood of an obama presidency. his "obamaness" isn't much admired among repubs regardless of how much mccain is loathed within his own party. 4 years of mclame is still more acceptable and recoverable from than an obama administration. the GOP and independent conservatives also see mccain as a one term prez and should be better prepared for a successful run in 2012 with a more acceptable candidate. at least they better be.

hopefully the dems will figure the repubs have already thrown in the towel, causing dems not show up at the polls in sufficient numbers in november.

i can watch IATTBYH any time i want...at any time of the day...along with a bonus disc...

seriously....any time i want...

I

i guess we'll be expecting another round of stimulus checks according to obama's press conference the other day.

he promises a second round of checks once he's prez, so it's not just a bush gimmick after all.

vote for barack and another $300-$1200 will magically appear in your mailbox.

yay!