Real Class Warfare
 

"X ` Man" wrote in message
...


Since I am fairly well-known "in these here parts" as a liberal and as a
supporter of trade unionism, I doubt the Wall Street protestors will be
breaking down my door.

-----------------------------------------------

That's an interesting comment Harry.

Does that mean that a conservative minded individual of similar personal
economic/financial status, but *not* a strong supporter
of trade unionism may be subject to Wall Street protestors at their door?

I know many "Social Democrats" who are very tight and protective of their
personal wealth, whatever it may be. I also know of
hard core Conservatives who routinely share what extra they may have without
hesitation to help others. I don't think that political
ideology dictates one's sense of responsibility to their fellow man, despite
the current myriad attempts to convince otherwise.

It's a personal, morality based choice .... not a politically derived
directive.

Eisboch

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/2011 12:52 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:16:06 -0700, wrote:

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 14:23:23 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:35:40 -0400, X `


I'm only armed and dangerous when little twerps with ponytails try to
break in...

That sounds like the people I see on CNN from the OWS crowd.

You're wrong. First, most of them are educated.

There are plenty of educated people with pony tails, including the
professors who taught them.

Second, there's a lot of people who've been left out of this economy
that used to have a place. Not poor folk, but lower middle, middle
and even upper middle class who can no longer earn a living.

Times are tough for a lot of people but I do not see any solutions
coming from these protestors, nor from the government.
They should be protesting in front of the companies that offshored all
the jobs if they are mad about being out of work.
Maybe they should be protesting all the consumers who choose a cheap
price over a "made in USA" label.
Of course they could go protest the university that sent them out into
the world with a useless degree and a $100,000 student loan bill.

There will never be a shortage of things for liberals to protest about.
Some of them even make a career of it. Jessie Jackson is the first one
that comes to mind, and our hope and change boy could probably be
considered a protestor for hire. Then on the entertainment side you have
Andy Rooney and Rush etc.

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/2011 2:34 AM, jps wrote:
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:52:47 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:16:06 -0700, wrote:

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 14:23:23 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:35:40 -0400, X `


I'm only armed and dangerous when little twerps with ponytails try to
break in...

That sounds like the people I see on CNN from the OWS crowd.

You're wrong. First, most of them are educated.

There are plenty of educated people with pony tails, including the
professors who taught them.

But not the little freak to which Harry refers.


Second, there's a lot of people who've been left out of this economy
that used to have a place. Not poor folk, but lower middle, middle
and even upper middle class who can no longer earn a living.

Times are tough for a lot of people but I do not see any solutions
coming from these protestors, nor from the government.
They should be protesting in front of the companies that offshored all
the jobs if they are mad about being out of work.
Maybe they should be protesting all the consumers who choose a cheap
price over a "made in USA" label.
Of course they could go protest the university that sent them out into
the world with a useless degree and a $100,000 student loan bill.

They're not there to provide answers but to call attention to the
pain. Those who fail to answer the call will be left to defend
themselves when push comes to shove.

You be talkin bout our own ex-man Harry?

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/2011 12:52 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 21:16:06 -0700, wrote:

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 14:23:23 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:35:40 -0400, X `


I'm only armed and dangerous when little twerps with ponytails try to
break in...

That sounds like the people I see on CNN from the OWS crowd.

You're wrong. First, most of them are educated.

There are plenty of educated people with pony tails, including the
professors who taught them.

Second, there's a lot of people who've been left out of this economy
that used to have a place. Not poor folk, but lower middle, middle
and even upper middle class who can no longer earn a living.

Times are tough for a lot of people but I do not see any solutions
coming from these protestors, nor from the government.
They should be protesting in front of the companies that offshored all
the jobs if they are mad about being out of work.
Maybe they should be protesting all the consumers who choose a cheap
price over a "made in USA" label.
Of course they could go protest the university that sent them out into
the world with a useless degree and a $100,000 student loan bill.

They are a continuation of the Obama/Google "Arab spring". Funny, months
ago Beck said it would spread from the Middle East, to Europe
(specifically Greece) then to NYC, then to other cities in the US. And
to think it all started as another campaign ploy by the WhiteHouse and
the SEIU...

http://tinyurl.com/5umbxkn

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/17/2011 11:50 PM, George C. Boater wrote:
Krausie wrote: Since I am fairly well-known "in these here parts"
as ....

___________

Is that a fact, Krausie?

I'll bet you're also known in them there parts as a lying, psychotic,
free loading gas bag.


I wonder what "these here parts" he's referring to.

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/2011 4:03 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
...


Since I am fairly well-known "in these here parts" as a liberal and as a
supporter of trade unionism, I doubt the Wall Street protestors will be
breaking down my door.

-----------------------------------------------

That's an interesting comment Harry.

Does that mean that a conservative minded individual of similar personal
economic/financial status, but *not* a strong supporter
of trade unionism may be subject to Wall Street protestors at their door?

I know many "Social Democrats" who are very tight and protective of
their personal wealth, whatever it may be. I also know of
hard core Conservatives who routinely share what extra they may have
without hesitation to help others. I don't think that political
ideology dictates one's sense of responsibility to their fellow man,
despite the current myriad attempts to convince otherwise.

It's a personal, morality based choice .... not a politically derived
directive.

Eisboch


Harry's a simple person. You fit into one of two categories according to
Harry.
1. You agree with him
2. You are a racist moron

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/11 4:03 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
...


Since I am fairly well-known "in these here parts" as a liberal and as a
supporter of trade unionism, I doubt the Wall Street protestors will be
breaking down my door.

-----------------------------------------------

That's an interesting comment Harry.

Does that mean that a conservative minded individual of similar personal
economic/financial status, but *not* a strong supporter
of trade unionism may be subject to Wall Street protestors at their door?

I know many "Social Democrats" who are very tight and protective of
their personal wealth, whatever it may be. I also know of
hard core Conservatives who routinely share what extra they may have
without hesitation to help others. I don't think that political
ideology dictates one's sense of responsibility to their fellow man,
despite the current myriad attempts to convince otherwise.

It's a personal, morality based choice .... not a politically derived
directive.

Eisboch


I don't read or see much of "hard core Conservatives" engaging in
discussions or activities aimed at fulfilling "one's sense of
responsibility to their fellow man." I won't disagree that in times gone
by, pre-Reagan, many Republicans were involved in activities to help the
less fortunate. Nowadays, not so much.

Real Class Warfare
 

On Oct 17, 7:52*am, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` *wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` * *wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there and roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of the serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and then they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the "French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial chiefs would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I thought this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked any real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured mass. It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to inspire the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems that the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless thugs bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder nobles. They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official murder. Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the right to
murder you?

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there and roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of the serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and then they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the "French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial chiefs would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I thought this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked any real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured mass. It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to inspire the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems that the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless thugs bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder nobles. They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official murder. Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the house and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the "French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I thought this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked any real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to inspire the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems that the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder nobles. They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official murder. Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the house and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists. You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a shooting.
Think about that, big boy.

Real Class Warfare
 

In article ,
says...

On 10/17/2011 4:46 PM, Canuck57 wrote:
On 17/10/2011 12:23 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:35:40 -0400, X `
wrote:

On 10/17/11 12:57 PM, wrote:
On Mon, 17 Oct 2011 09:03:32 -0400, wrote:

On 10/17/2011 6:30 AM, X ` Man wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and then they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the "French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Lets hope a similar fate doesn't come to your doorstep.

Harry is well armed and prepared to shoot any serf who comes to get
his stuff because he has more than they do, ;-)


Since I am fairly well-known "in these here parts" as a liberal and as a
supporter of trade unionism, I doubt the Wall Street protestors will be
breaking down my door.

I'm only armed and dangerous when little twerps with ponytails try to
break in...

That sounds like the people I see on CNN from the OWS crowd.

CNN is a dripping wet liberal-socialism farce propaganda machine.

Not nearly as bad as MSNBC, or PBS. CNN lies by omission, the other two
just make it up as they go along...

And Fox is fair and balanced and would never "lie by omission"....right?

Real Class Warfare
 

In article m,
says...

On 10/17/2011 11:50 PM, George C. Boater wrote:
Krausie wrote: Since I am fairly well-known "in these here parts"
as ....

___________

Is that a fact, Krausie?

I'll bet you're also known in them there parts as a lying, psychotic,
free loading gas bag.


I wonder what "these here parts" he's referring to.

His head.

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/11 8:38 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the "French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I thought
this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked any real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to inspire the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the
cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems that the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder nobles.
They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it
pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official murder. Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the house and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists. You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a shooting.
Think about that, big boy.


I'm more than a little familiar with gun safety and the "rules of
engagement" in this state. I take a couple of firearms courses every
year, and in every course, safety is stressed.

If it is the middle of the night and someone breaks in and that someone
is an ugly, squat little guy with a ponytail, I'll simply assume he
intends bodily harm and act accordingly. :) Maybe I'll have the
ponytail mounted on a wood base and hang it in the garage.

The reality is these days that a significant percentage of home burglars
are drug addicts looking for "merch" to steal so they have something to
pawn for cash.

I'm not in the least bit paranoid. I caught a burglar once, one who
started to come at me with a tire iron. He's probably just now getting
out of the slammer, since he drew a 20-year sentence. He was a big-time
burglar in NE Florida.

Real Class Warfare
 

"X ` Man" wrote in message ...

On 10/18/11 4:03 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
...


Since I am fairly well-known "in these here parts" as a liberal and as a
supporter of trade unionism, I doubt the Wall Street protestors will be
breaking down my door.

-----------------------------------------------

That's an interesting comment Harry.

Does that mean that a conservative minded individual of similar personal
economic/financial status, but *not* a strong supporter
of trade unionism may be subject to Wall Street protestors at their door?

I know many "Social Democrats" who are very tight and protective of
their personal wealth, whatever it may be. I also know of
hard core Conservatives who routinely share what extra they may have
without hesitation to help others. I don't think that political
ideology dictates one's sense of responsibility to their fellow man,
despite the current myriad attempts to convince otherwise.

It's a personal, morality based choice .... not a politically derived
directive.

Eisboch


I don't read or see much of "hard core Conservatives" engaging in
discussions or activities aimed at fulfilling "one's sense of
responsibility to their fellow man." I won't disagree that in times gone
by, pre-Reagan, many Republicans were involved in activities to help the
less fortunate. Nowadays, not so much.

---------------------------------------------------

Well, "there you go again" .... :-)
making social responsibility issues a politically derived directive.

There's a myth that exists that being "liberal" means you are more sensitive
and proactive in assuming financial responsibility for
your fellow man. The facts simply don't support that. Those who identify
themselves as Republicans give more out of
their own pocket than those who identify themselves as Democrats. There
are several studies available on the 'net that provide the supporting
data.

There *is* on major difference. Republicans tend to give from their own
pockets. Democrats tend to give from other people's
pockets.

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/2011 8:47 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 8:38 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the "French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I thought
this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked any
real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to inspire the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the
cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems that
the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder nobles.
They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it
pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official murder.
Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the house and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists. You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a shooting.
Think about that, big boy.


I'm more than a little familiar with gun safety and the "rules of
engagement" in this state. I take a couple of firearms courses every
year, and in every course, safety is stressed.

If it is the middle of the night and someone breaks in and that someone
is an ugly, squat little guy with a ponytail, I'll simply assume he
intends bodily harm and act accordingly. :) Maybe I'll have the
ponytail mounted on a wood base and hang it in the garage.

The reality is these days that a significant percentage of home burglars
are drug addicts looking for "merch" to steal so they have something to
pawn for cash.

I'm not in the least bit paranoid. I caught a burglar once, one who
started to come at me with a tire iron. He's probably just now getting
out of the slammer, since he drew a 20-year sentence. He was a big-time
burglar in NE Florida.

ahhhh haaaa, is that the one who stood directly in the middle of the
garage, against the wall, so you could sneak up on him with your Toyota
Tundra and pin him perfectly against the wall till the cops got there?
LOL, harry, nobody believes you, good Harrytale though...

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/2011 9:04 AM, Eisboch wrote:


There *is* on major difference. Republicans tend to give from their own
pockets. Democrats tend to give from other people's
pockets.



You've found your NG rhythm.

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/11 9:04 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message ...

On 10/18/11 4:03 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
...


Since I am fairly well-known "in these here parts" as a liberal and as a
supporter of trade unionism, I doubt the Wall Street protestors will be
breaking down my door.

-----------------------------------------------

That's an interesting comment Harry.

Does that mean that a conservative minded individual of similar personal
economic/financial status, but *not* a strong supporter
of trade unionism may be subject to Wall Street protestors at their door?

I know many "Social Democrats" who are very tight and protective of
their personal wealth, whatever it may be. I also know of
hard core Conservatives who routinely share what extra they may have
without hesitation to help others. I don't think that political
ideology dictates one's sense of responsibility to their fellow man,
despite the current myriad attempts to convince otherwise.

It's a personal, morality based choice .... not a politically derived
directive.

Eisboch


I don't read or see much of "hard core Conservatives" engaging in
discussions or activities aimed at fulfilling "one's sense of
responsibility to their fellow man." I won't disagree that in times gone
by, pre-Reagan, many Republicans were involved in activities to help the
less fortunate. Nowadays, not so much.

---------------------------------------------------

Well, "there you go again" .... :-)
making social responsibility issues a politically derived directive.

There's a myth that exists that being "liberal" means you are more
sensitive and proactive in assuming financial responsibility for
your fellow man. The facts simply don't support that. Those who identify
themselves as Republicans give more out of
their own pocket than those who identify themselves as Democrats. There
are several studies available on the 'net that provide the supporting
data.

There *is* on major difference. Republicans tend to give from their own
pockets. Democrats tend to give from other people's
pockets.


Republicans tend to give their charity to their church, which may or may
not use that money for charitable purposes. There actually was a study
done about this some years ago.

This is only anecdotal, but about a dozen years ago I was attending a
holiday gathering. There were several couples there who were Republicans
and evangelical Christians and they passed around a flyer whose purpose
was to raise funds for a "mission" their church was engaged in in
Central America. Purpose of the mission? To "spread the word of Jesus"
to indigenous peoples who already were Roman Catholic.

I started laughing, and I was asked why I was. "You want money to
convert Christians to Christianity!"

"Oh no," I was told "Catholics aren't Christians."

I think my response was, "You people are crazy."

It turns out that one of those couples is now home-schooling their
children because they don't want the kids *exposed* to "non-Christian"
kids. One can only imagine what sort of mindless automatons those kids
will turn out to be.

What's the point? There is charitable giving and there is charitable
giving. To me, a charitable gift should go to help people with their
needs for food, shelter, clothing, medical care, et cetera. I don't
believe money donated to charity should be used to gain converts or to
build buildings. If it is, it shouldn't be. Further, as religious
donations are deductible, I think donations used to proselytize
shouldn't be deductible.

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/11 9:13 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 8:47 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 8:38 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the "French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I thought
this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked any
real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to inspire
the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the
cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems that
the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder nobles.
They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it
pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever
available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official murder.
Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many
states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the house and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can
warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists. You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a shooting.
Think about that, big boy.


I'm more than a little familiar with gun safety and the "rules of
engagement" in this state. I take a couple of firearms courses every
year, and in every course, safety is stressed.

If it is the middle of the night and someone breaks in and that someone
is an ugly, squat little guy with a ponytail, I'll simply assume he
intends bodily harm and act accordingly. :) Maybe I'll have the
ponytail mounted on a wood base and hang it in the garage.

The reality is these days that a significant percentage of home burglars
are drug addicts looking for "merch" to steal so they have something to
pawn for cash.

I'm not in the least bit paranoid. I caught a burglar once, one who
started to come at me with a tire iron. He's probably just now getting
out of the slammer, since he drew a 20-year sentence. He was a big-time
burglar in NE Florida.

ahhhh haaaa, is that the one who stood directly in the middle of the
garage, against the wall, so you could sneak up on him with your Toyota
Tundra and pin him perfectly against the wall till the cops got there?
LOL, harry, nobody believes you, good Harrytale though...


No, **** for brains, I pinned him between the bumper of his car, which
was in my garage, and my *FORD* truck's bumper. It's too bad you don't
ever get anything right.

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/2011 9:25 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:13 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 8:47 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 8:38 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of
the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the "French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial
chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I thought
this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked any
real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to inspire
the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the
cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just
doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems that
the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder nobles.
They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it
pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever
available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official murder.
Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many
states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not
justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral
right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the house
and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can
warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists. You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a shooting.
Think about that, big boy.


I'm more than a little familiar with gun safety and the "rules of
engagement" in this state. I take a couple of firearms courses every
year, and in every course, safety is stressed.

If it is the middle of the night and someone breaks in and that someone
is an ugly, squat little guy with a ponytail, I'll simply assume he
intends bodily harm and act accordingly. :) Maybe I'll have the
ponytail mounted on a wood base and hang it in the garage.

The reality is these days that a significant percentage of home burglars
are drug addicts looking for "merch" to steal so they have something to
pawn for cash.

I'm not in the least bit paranoid. I caught a burglar once, one who
started to come at me with a tire iron. He's probably just now getting
out of the slammer, since he drew a 20-year sentence. He was a big-time
burglar in NE Florida.

ahhhh haaaa, is that the one who stood directly in the middle of the
garage, against the wall, so you could sneak up on him with your Toyota
Tundra and pin him perfectly against the wall till the cops got there?
LOL, harry, nobody believes you, good Harrytale though...


No, **** for brains, I pinned him between the bumper of his car, which
was in my garage, and my *FORD* truck's bumper. It's too bad you don't
ever get anything right.

Yeah, uh.. What was the date on that, I bet the police report is a
spectacular read? Was this before or after your father crossed the
Atlantic in a small skiff to a fireboat welcome, or did you wait till
you graduated from Yale? snerk

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/11 9:31 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 9:25 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:13 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 8:47 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 8:38 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of
the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and
then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the
"French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial
chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I thought
this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked any
real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to inspire
the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the
cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just
doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems that
the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless
thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder nobles.
They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it
pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever
available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official murder.
Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the
right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many
states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that
doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not
justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have
the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral
right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the house
and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can
warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists. You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a shooting.
Think about that, big boy.


I'm more than a little familiar with gun safety and the "rules of
engagement" in this state. I take a couple of firearms courses every
year, and in every course, safety is stressed.

If it is the middle of the night and someone breaks in and that someone
is an ugly, squat little guy with a ponytail, I'll simply assume he
intends bodily harm and act accordingly. :) Maybe I'll have the
ponytail mounted on a wood base and hang it in the garage.

The reality is these days that a significant percentage of home
burglars
are drug addicts looking for "merch" to steal so they have something to
pawn for cash.

I'm not in the least bit paranoid. I caught a burglar once, one who
started to come at me with a tire iron. He's probably just now getting
out of the slammer, since he drew a 20-year sentence. He was a big-time
burglar in NE Florida.

ahhhh haaaa, is that the one who stood directly in the middle of the
garage, against the wall, so you could sneak up on him with your Toyota
Tundra and pin him perfectly against the wall till the cops got there?
LOL, harry, nobody believes you, good Harrytale though...


No, **** for brains, I pinned him between the bumper of his car, which
was in my garage, and my *FORD* truck's bumper. It's too bad you don't
ever get anything right.

Yeah, uh.. What was the date on that, I bet the police report is a
spectacular read? Was this before or after your father crossed the
Atlantic in a small skiff to a fireboat welcome, or did you wait till
you graduated from Yale? snerk

D'oh. The crossing was not in a "small skiff," **** for brains.

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/2011 9:35 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:31 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 9:25 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:13 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 8:47 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 8:38 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there
and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of
the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and
then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the
"French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial
chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I
thought
this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked any
real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured
mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax
collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to inspire
the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the
cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just
doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems
that
the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless
thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder
nobles.
They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it
pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever
available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official murder.
Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its
actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the
right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many
states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that
doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not
justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have
the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral
right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the house
and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can
warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists. You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a
shooting.
Think about that, big boy.


I'm more than a little familiar with gun safety and the "rules of
engagement" in this state. I take a couple of firearms courses every
year, and in every course, safety is stressed.

If it is the middle of the night and someone breaks in and that
someone
is an ugly, squat little guy with a ponytail, I'll simply assume he
intends bodily harm and act accordingly. :) Maybe I'll have the
ponytail mounted on a wood base and hang it in the garage.

The reality is these days that a significant percentage of home
burglars
are drug addicts looking for "merch" to steal so they have
something to
pawn for cash.

I'm not in the least bit paranoid. I caught a burglar once, one who
started to come at me with a tire iron. He's probably just now getting
out of the slammer, since he drew a 20-year sentence. He was a
big-time
burglar in NE Florida.

ahhhh haaaa, is that the one who stood directly in the middle of the
garage, against the wall, so you could sneak up on him with your Toyota
Tundra and pin him perfectly against the wall till the cops got there?
LOL, harry, nobody believes you, good Harrytale though...


No, **** for brains, I pinned him between the bumper of his car, which
was in my garage, and my *FORD* truck's bumper. It's too bad you don't
ever get anything right.

Yeah, uh.. What was the date on that, I bet the police report is a
spectacular read? Was this before or after your father crossed the
Atlantic in a small skiff to a fireboat welcome, or did you wait till
you graduated from Yale? snerk

D'oh. The crossing was not in a "small skiff," **** for brains.

Harry, you can't even keep up with your own lies. What was the date of
that Fireboat Welcome, because somebody seems to have forgotten to note
it anywhere? LOL! HarryTales...!!!

Real Class Warfare
 

"Drifter" wrote in message
eb.com...

On 10/18/2011 9:04 AM, Eisboch wrote:


There *is* on major difference. Republicans tend to give from their own
pockets. Democrats tend to give from other people's
pockets.



You've found your NG rhythm.

--------------------------------------------------

I guess. Guitar sales are slow.

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/11 9:36 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 9:35 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:31 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 9:25 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:13 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 8:47 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 8:38 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there
and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of
the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and
then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the
"French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial
chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I
thought
this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked
any
real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured
mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax
collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to
inspire
the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the
cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just
doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems
that
the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless
thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses
and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder
nobles.
They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it
pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever
available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official
murder.
Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its
actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the
right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many
states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that
doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not
justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have
the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral
right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the house
and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can
warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists.
You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull
the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a
shooting.
Think about that, big boy.


I'm more than a little familiar with gun safety and the "rules of
engagement" in this state. I take a couple of firearms courses every
year, and in every course, safety is stressed.

If it is the middle of the night and someone breaks in and that
someone
is an ugly, squat little guy with a ponytail, I'll simply assume he
intends bodily harm and act accordingly. :) Maybe I'll have the
ponytail mounted on a wood base and hang it in the garage.

The reality is these days that a significant percentage of home
burglars
are drug addicts looking for "merch" to steal so they have
something to
pawn for cash.

I'm not in the least bit paranoid. I caught a burglar once, one who
started to come at me with a tire iron. He's probably just now
getting
out of the slammer, since he drew a 20-year sentence. He was a
big-time
burglar in NE Florida.

ahhhh haaaa, is that the one who stood directly in the middle of the
garage, against the wall, so you could sneak up on him with your
Toyota
Tundra and pin him perfectly against the wall till the cops got there?
LOL, harry, nobody believes you, good Harrytale though...


No, **** for brains, I pinned him between the bumper of his car, which
was in my garage, and my *FORD* truck's bumper. It's too bad you don't
ever get anything right.

Yeah, uh.. What was the date on that, I bet the police report is a
spectacular read? Was this before or after your father crossed the
Atlantic in a small skiff to a fireboat welcome, or did you wait till
you graduated from Yale? snerk

D'oh. The crossing was not in a "small skiff," **** for brains.

Harry, you can't even keep up with your own lies. What was the date of
that Fireboat Welcome, because somebody seems to have forgotten to note
it anywhere? LOL! HarryTales...!!!

It was pre-internet, **** for brains. I doubt it is "noted" anywhere.
Why would it be?

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/2011 9:41 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:36 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 9:35 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:31 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 9:25 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:13 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 8:47 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 8:38 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara
Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The
peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there
and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A
dozen of
the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and
then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in
this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the
"French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial
chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I
thought
this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked
any
real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured
mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax
collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to
inspire
the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the
cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just
doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems
that
the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless
thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses
and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder
nobles.
They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it
pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever
available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official
murder.
Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its
actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the
right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many
states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that
doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not
justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have
the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral
right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the
house
and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be
it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can
warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists.
You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull
the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a
shooting.
Think about that, big boy.


I'm more than a little familiar with gun safety and the "rules of
engagement" in this state. I take a couple of firearms courses every
year, and in every course, safety is stressed.

If it is the middle of the night and someone breaks in and that
someone
is an ugly, squat little guy with a ponytail, I'll simply assume he
intends bodily harm and act accordingly. :) Maybe I'll have the
ponytail mounted on a wood base and hang it in the garage.

The reality is these days that a significant percentage of home
burglars
are drug addicts looking for "merch" to steal so they have
something to
pawn for cash.

I'm not in the least bit paranoid. I caught a burglar once, one who
started to come at me with a tire iron. He's probably just now
getting
out of the slammer, since he drew a 20-year sentence. He was a
big-time
burglar in NE Florida.

ahhhh haaaa, is that the one who stood directly in the middle of the
garage, against the wall, so you could sneak up on him with your
Toyota
Tundra and pin him perfectly against the wall till the cops got
there?
LOL, harry, nobody believes you, good Harrytale though...


No, **** for brains, I pinned him between the bumper of his car, which
was in my garage, and my *FORD* truck's bumper. It's too bad you don't
ever get anything right.

Yeah, uh.. What was the date on that, I bet the police report is a
spectacular read? Was this before or after your father crossed the
Atlantic in a small skiff to a fireboat welcome, or did you wait till
you graduated from Yale? snerk

D'oh. The crossing was not in a "small skiff," **** for brains.

Harry, you can't even keep up with your own lies. What was the date of
that Fireboat Welcome, because somebody seems to have forgotten to note
it anywhere? LOL! HarryTales...!!!

It was pre-internet, **** for brains. I doubt it is "noted" anywhere.
Why would it be?




So, you are sticking to the story about the Fireboat welcome in NYC for
your dad after he crossed the Atlantic in a small skiff? LOL!!!

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/11 9:40 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"Drifter" wrote in message
eb.com...

On 10/18/2011 9:04 AM, Eisboch wrote:


There *is* on major difference. Republicans tend to give from their own
pockets. Democrats tend to give from other people's
pockets.



You've found your NG rhythm.

--------------------------------------------------

I guess. Guitar sales are slow.



All your customers are down at Wall Street! :)

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/11 9:49 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 9:41 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:36 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 9:35 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:31 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 9:25 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:13 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 8:47 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 8:38 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara
Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The
peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there
and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A
dozen of
the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and
then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then
they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in
this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the
"French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial
chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I
thought
this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked
any
real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured
mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax
collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to
inspire
the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the
cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just
doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems
that
the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid
the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless
thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses
and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder
nobles.
They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it
pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever
available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official
murder.
Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its
actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the
right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many
states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that
doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not
justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't
have
the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral
right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the
house
and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be
it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can
warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists.
You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull
the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a
shooting.
Think about that, big boy.


I'm more than a little familiar with gun safety and the "rules of
engagement" in this state. I take a couple of firearms courses
every
year, and in every course, safety is stressed.

If it is the middle of the night and someone breaks in and that
someone
is an ugly, squat little guy with a ponytail, I'll simply assume he
intends bodily harm and act accordingly. :) Maybe I'll have the
ponytail mounted on a wood base and hang it in the garage.

The reality is these days that a significant percentage of home
burglars
are drug addicts looking for "merch" to steal so they have
something to
pawn for cash.

I'm not in the least bit paranoid. I caught a burglar once, one who
started to come at me with a tire iron. He's probably just now
getting
out of the slammer, since he drew a 20-year sentence. He was a
big-time
burglar in NE Florida.

ahhhh haaaa, is that the one who stood directly in the middle of the
garage, against the wall, so you could sneak up on him with your
Toyota
Tundra and pin him perfectly against the wall till the cops got
there?
LOL, harry, nobody believes you, good Harrytale though...


No, **** for brains, I pinned him between the bumper of his car,
which
was in my garage, and my *FORD* truck's bumper. It's too bad you
don't
ever get anything right.

Yeah, uh.. What was the date on that, I bet the police report is a
spectacular read? Was this before or after your father crossed the
Atlantic in a small skiff to a fireboat welcome, or did you wait till
you graduated from Yale? snerk

D'oh. The crossing was not in a "small skiff," **** for brains.

Harry, you can't even keep up with your own lies. What was the date of
that Fireboat Welcome, because somebody seems to have forgotten to note
it anywhere? LOL! HarryTales...!!!

It was pre-internet, **** for brains. I doubt it is "noted" anywhere.
Why would it be?




So, you are sticking to the story about the Fireboat welcome in NYC for
your dad after he crossed the Atlantic in a small skiff? LOL!!!

Once again, it was not a small skiff. Got it? I never said it was a
small skiff. You or one of your equally stupid buddies came to that
conclusion.

Real Class Warfare
 

"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 10/18/11 9:40 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"Drifter" wrote in message
eb.com...

On 10/18/2011 9:04 AM, Eisboch wrote:


There *is* on major difference. Republicans tend to give from their own
pockets. Democrats tend to give from other people's
pockets.



You've found your NG rhythm.

--------------------------------------------------

I guess. Guitar sales are slow.



All your customers are down at Wall Street! :)
==================================

Maybe. One thing this experience has taught me. There are many, many
talented musicians in this world.
Most are broke.

Real Class Warfare
 

In article ,
says...

On 10/18/11 8:38 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the "French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I thought
this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked any real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to inspire the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the
cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems that the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder nobles.
They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it
pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official murder. Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the house and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists. You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a shooting.
Think about that, big boy.


I'm more than a little familiar with gun safety and the "rules of
engagement" in this state. I take a couple of firearms courses every
year, and in every course, safety is stressed.

If it is the middle of the night and someone breaks in and that someone
is an ugly, squat little guy with a ponytail, I'll simply assume he
intends bodily harm and act accordingly. :) Maybe I'll have the
ponytail mounted on a wood base and hang it in the garage.

Yes, we all know what a coward you are, Harry.

The reality is these days that a significant percentage of home burglars
are drug addicts looking for "merch" to steal so they have something to
pawn for cash.

Yet you think we should coddle them.

I'm not in the least bit paranoid. I caught a burglar once, one who
started to come at me with a tire iron. He's probably just now getting
out of the slammer, since he drew a 20-year sentence. He was a big-time
burglar in NE Florida.

Bull****!

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/11 9:56 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 10/18/11 9:40 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"Drifter" wrote in message
eb.com...

On 10/18/2011 9:04 AM, Eisboch wrote:


There *is* on major difference. Republicans tend to give from their own
pockets. Democrats tend to give from other people's
pockets.



You've found your NG rhythm.

--------------------------------------------------

I guess. Guitar sales are slow.



All your customers are down at Wall Street! :)
==================================

Maybe. One thing this experience has taught me. There are many, many
talented musicians in this world.
Most are broke.



That's pretty much the case in all the performing arts.

Real Class Warfare
 

In article ,
says...

On 10/18/11 9:36 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 9:35 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:31 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 9:25 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 9:13 AM, JustWait wrote:
On 10/18/2011 8:47 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 8:38 AM, Drifter wrote:
On 10/18/2011 7:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 6:54 AM, Tim wrote:
On Oct 17, 7:52 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:41 AM, Tim wrote:









On Oct 17, 7:30 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/17/11 8:22 AM, Tim wrote:

On Oct 17, 5:30 am, X ` wrote:
In 1358, according to historian and author Barbara Tuchman, a
peasant
revolution started in the Oise valley of France. The peasants
attacked
and looted a manor house, killed the knight who lived there
and
roasted
him on a spit while his wife and children watched. A dozen of
the
serfs
raped the lady of the manor while the children watched, and
then
they
forced her to eat the cooked flesh of her husband. Then they
killed her.

Now that is serious class warfare.

Discussing whether the top one percent of the wealthy in this
country
should pay a higher tax rate is not, though I think the
"French"
treatment of a few dozen Wall Street chiefs and industrial
chiefs
would
provide quicker results.

Wiki gives credit of the story to one Jean La Bel, but I
thought
this
line was interesting:

"The peasants involved in the rebellion seem to have lacked
any
real
organization, instead rising up locally as an unstructured
mass.
It is
speculated by Jean le Bel that evil governors and tax
collectors
spread the word of rebellion from village to village to
inspire
the
peasants to rebel against the nobility. When asked as to the
cause of
their discontent they apparently replied that they were just
doing
what they had witnessed others doing. Additionally it seems
that
the
rebellion contained some idea that it was possible to rid the
world of
nobles. Froissart's account portrays the rebels as mindless
thugs
bent
on destruction, which they wreaked on over 150 noble houses
and
castles, murdering the families in horrendous ways."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacquerie#The_uprising

In the 14th Century, the serfs had every reason to murder
nobles.
They
still do.

Harry, nobody has the right to 'murder' anyone...

In the 14th Century, the nobility murdered just about anyone it
pleased,
and with impunity. Since the serfs had no justice whatsoever
available
to them, turnabout was seen as fair play.

Even in this country and in this century, we have official
murder.
Some
may say that those killed in wars or by the executioner are not
murdered, but "the state" will say anything to justify its
actions.

Harry,. who do you have the right to murder, and who has the
right to
murder you?


Murder simply defined is *illegal* homicide. The country and many
states
engage in homicide and justify it by saying it was *legal*.
The state of course can make anything it likes legal, but that
doesn't
make it justified. Executions may be legal, but they are not
justified.
Killing of non-combatants in a war is murder.

The situation is different in a case of self-defense. I don't have
the
right to murder anyone, but I do have the legal and I think moral
right
to defend myself or my wife from intruders who break into the house
and
intend bodily harm. If that means shooting the intruders, so be it.

It's not the same as execution. The state has a choice. It can
warehouse
violent offenders until they die of old age. There are no such
alternative when dealing with a home invader.

You should know that all intruders are not murderers and rapists.
You
better make sure you are targeted for bodily harm before you pull
the
trigger. Your paranoia will work against you in defense of a
shooting.
Think about that, big boy.


I'm more than a little familiar with gun safety and the "rules of
engagement" in this state. I take a couple of firearms courses every
year, and in every course, safety is stressed.

If it is the middle of the night and someone breaks in and that
someone
is an ugly, squat little guy with a ponytail, I'll simply assume he
intends bodily harm and act accordingly. :) Maybe I'll have the
ponytail mounted on a wood base and hang it in the garage.

The reality is these days that a significant percentage of home
burglars
are drug addicts looking for "merch" to steal so they have
something to
pawn for cash.

I'm not in the least bit paranoid. I caught a burglar once, one who
started to come at me with a tire iron. He's probably just now
getting
out of the slammer, since he drew a 20-year sentence. He was a
big-time
burglar in NE Florida.

ahhhh haaaa, is that the one who stood directly in the middle of the
garage, against the wall, so you could sneak up on him with your
Toyota
Tundra and pin him perfectly against the wall till the cops got there?
LOL, harry, nobody believes you, good Harrytale though...


No, **** for brains, I pinned him between the bumper of his car, which
was in my garage, and my *FORD* truck's bumper. It's too bad you don't
ever get anything right.

Yeah, uh.. What was the date on that, I bet the police report is a
spectacular read? Was this before or after your father crossed the
Atlantic in a small skiff to a fireboat welcome, or did you wait till
you graduated from Yale? snerk

D'oh. The crossing was not in a "small skiff," **** for brains.

Harry, you can't even keep up with your own lies. What was the date of
that Fireboat Welcome, because somebody seems to have forgotten to note
it anywhere? LOL! HarryTales...!!!

It was pre-internet, **** for brains. I doubt it is "noted" anywhere.
Why would it be?

A quick call to the NYCFD got me an answer that they have records of ALL
such incidences. So, when was it, Harry?

Real Class Warfare
 

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:56:13 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:



"X ` Man" wrote in message
om...

On 10/18/11 9:40 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"Drifter" wrote in message
eb.com...

On 10/18/2011 9:04 AM, Eisboch wrote:


There *is* on major difference. Republicans tend to give from their own
pockets. Democrats tend to give from other people's
pockets.



You've found your NG rhythm.

--------------------------------------------------

I guess. Guitar sales are slow.



All your customers are down at Wall Street! :)
==================================

Maybe. One thing this experience has taught me. There are many, many
talented musicians in this world.
Most are broke.

======================

I wonder if you might have an opportunity there as a part time talent
scout/impressario? How about a weekly or monthly event at the store
where you give people 10 minutes each to strut their best stuff?

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/2011 11:53 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:56:13 -0400, wrote:



"X ` Man" wrote in message
m...

On 10/18/11 9:40 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"Drifter" wrote in message
eb.com...

On 10/18/2011 9:04 AM, Eisboch wrote:


There *is* on major difference. Republicans tend to give from their own
pockets. Democrats tend to give from other people's
pockets.



You've found your NG rhythm.

--------------------------------------------------

I guess. Guitar sales are slow.



All your customers are down at Wall Street! :)
==================================

Maybe. One thing this experience has taught me. There are many, many
talented musicians in this world.
Most are broke.

======================

I wonder if you might have an opportunity there as a part time talent
scout/impressario? How about a weekly or monthly event at the store
where you give people 10 minutes each to strut their best stuff?


He has a sound stage built in, and has open mic on Thursday nights...
You should check out some of the videos, nice sound system, lot's of
talented folks...

Real Class Warfare
 

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:56:13 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:



"X ` Man" wrote in message
om...

On 10/18/11 9:40 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"Drifter" wrote in message
eb.com...

On 10/18/2011 9:04 AM, Eisboch wrote:


There *is* on major difference. Republicans tend to give from their own
pockets. Democrats tend to give from other people's
pockets.



You've found your NG rhythm.

--------------------------------------------------

I guess. Guitar sales are slow.



All your customers are down at Wall Street! :)
==================================

Maybe. One thing this experience has taught me. There are many, many
talented musicians in this world.
Most are broke.

======================

I wonder if you might have an opportunity there as a part time talent
scout/impressario? How about a weekly or monthly event at the store
where you give people 10 minutes each to strut their best stuff?
--------------------------------------------

We pretty much do that already. Every Thursday night we host an Open Mic
from 6pm to 10:30 or so.
Some performers are very, very good. Some should never quit their day
jobs. But, it's all for fun.

We also have hosted some mini-concerts for performers who are trying to take
a serious step towards
major recording contracts, etc. One young lady has just about made it.
Another is doing a concert
November 19th.

I don't charge people for this. I actually enjoy having them perform and I
get a kick out of recording them
live and running the sound system to try and make them sound as good as
possible. I get help from others
in the industry also who really have a passion for this this stuff. I
enjoy it, but I really am not a very good musician
so, I stick to the amps, mixers, PA systems, etc. I occasionally sit in
with a band either strumming a guitar or
trying to play the Hammond to add a little effect.

If you go to the shop's website and click on the "YouTube" logo, it will
take you to the shop's YouTube channel.
There you can view over 140 videos of various people performing on the shop
stage, most from Open Mic nights,
but some from mini-concerts. The video and audio varies from so-so to
halfway decent, depending on what
equipment I was using at the time and when it was done. The shop website
URL is: www.re-tunes.net

Real Class Warfare
 

In article ,
says...

"Wayne.B" wrote in message
...

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 09:56:13 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:



"X ` Man" wrote in message
om...

On 10/18/11 9:40 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"Drifter" wrote in message
eb.com...

On 10/18/2011 9:04 AM, Eisboch wrote:


There *is* on major difference. Republicans tend to give from their own
pockets. Democrats tend to give from other people's
pockets.



You've found your NG rhythm.

--------------------------------------------------

I guess. Guitar sales are slow.



All your customers are down at Wall Street! :)
==================================

Maybe. One thing this experience has taught me. There are many, many
talented musicians in this world.
Most are broke.

======================

I wonder if you might have an opportunity there as a part time talent
scout/impressario? How about a weekly or monthly event at the store
where you give people 10 minutes each to strut their best stuff?
--------------------------------------------

We pretty much do that already. Every Thursday night we host an Open Mic
from 6pm to 10:30 or so.
Some performers are very, very good. Some should never quit their day
jobs. But, it's all for fun.

We also have hosted some mini-concerts for performers who are trying to take
a serious step towards
major recording contracts, etc. One young lady has just about made it.
Another is doing a concert
November 19th.

I don't charge people for this. I actually enjoy having them perform and I
get a kick out of recording them
live and running the sound system to try and make them sound as good as
possible. I get help from others
in the industry also who really have a passion for this this stuff. I
enjoy it, but I really am not a very good musician
so, I stick to the amps, mixers, PA systems, etc. I occasionally sit in
with a band either strumming a guitar or
trying to play the Hammond to add a little effect.

If you go to the shop's website and click on the "YouTube" logo, it will
take you to the shop's YouTube channel.
There you can view over 140 videos of various people performing on the shop
stage, most from Open Mic nights,
but some from mini-concerts. The video and audio varies from so-so to
halfway decent, depending on what
equipment I was using at the time and when it was done. The shop website
URL is: www.re-tunes.net

I really like Jerry Perry and his daughters video.

Real Class Warfare
 

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:31:01 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 08:45:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

CNN is a dripping wet liberal-socialism farce propaganda machine.

Not nearly as bad as MSNBC, or PBS. CNN lies by omission, the other two
just make it up as they go along...

And Fox is fair and balanced and would never "lie by omission"....right?

CNN may be the most balanced, based on the fact that both sides are
****ed at them. ;-)

CNN is corporate news. They're anything but in the middle. PBS and
BBC are closer to real news.

Real Class Warfare
 

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 15:06:44 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:49:01 -0700, jps wrote:

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:31:01 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 08:45:32 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article ,
says...

CNN is a dripping wet liberal-socialism farce propaganda machine.



CNN is corporate news. They're anything but in the middle. PBS and
BBC are closer to real news.

That simply reflects your views. I bet you think Rachel is fair and
balanced too.

No, but she's a ****load more intellectually honest than her
counterparts on the right.

I got tired of the noise and cut them all off.

Did you watch the Zbig interview from Morning Joe?

Real Class Warfare
 

On 10/18/11 3:06 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:49:01 -0700, wrote:

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:31:01 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 08:45:32 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...

CNN is a dripping wet liberal-socialism farce propaganda machine.



CNN is corporate news. They're anything but in the middle. PBS and
BBC are closer to real news.

That simply reflects your views. I bet you think Rachel is fair and
balanced too.



Rachel is an advocate, and she's just terrific. She is without question
the smartest woman on television.

Real Class Warfare
 

In article ,
says...

On 10/18/11 3:06 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 11:49:01 -0700, wrote:

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 13:31:01 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 18 Oct 2011 08:45:32 -0400, wrote:

In ,
says...

CNN is a dripping wet liberal-socialism farce propaganda machine.



CNN is corporate news. They're anything but in the middle. PBS and
BBC are closer to real news.

That simply reflects your views. I bet you think Rachel is fair and
balanced too.



Rachel is an advocate, and she's just terrific. She is without question
the smartest woman on television.

That wasn't his question. Do you think she's fair and balanced?

Real Class Warfare
 

On 18/10/2011 2:03 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
...


Since I am fairly well-known "in these here parts" as a liberal and as a
supporter of trade unionism, I doubt the Wall Street protestors will be
breaking down my door.

-----------------------------------------------

That's an interesting comment Harry.

Does that mean that a conservative minded individual of similar personal
economic/financial status, but *not* a strong supporter
of trade unionism may be subject to Wall Street protestors at their door?

I know many "Social Democrats" who are very tight and protective of
their personal wealth, whatever it may be. I also know of
hard core Conservatives who routinely share what extra they may have
without hesitation to help others. I don't think that political
ideology dictates one's sense of responsibility to their fellow man,
despite the current myriad attempts to convince otherwise.

It's a personal, morality based choice .... not a politically derived
directive.

Eisboch

Pelushi has been on the outs with 0bama ever since 0bama's eat the rich
speech. So have a few other democrats, so much so 0bama couldn't get
his legislation past the democrats, forget the GOP and Tea Party.

--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs. But
we have big huge government we can't afford...
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude

Real Class Warfare
 

On 18/10/2011 4:53 AM, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/18/11 4:03 AM, Eisboch wrote:


"X ` Man" wrote in message
...


Since I am fairly well-known "in these here parts" as a liberal and as a
supporter of trade unionism, I doubt the Wall Street protestors will be
breaking down my door.

-----------------------------------------------

That's an interesting comment Harry.

Does that mean that a conservative minded individual of similar personal
economic/financial status, but *not* a strong supporter
of trade unionism may be subject to Wall Street protestors at their door?

I know many "Social Democrats" who are very tight and protective of
their personal wealth, whatever it may be. I also know of
hard core Conservatives who routinely share what extra they may have
without hesitation to help others. I don't think that political
ideology dictates one's sense of responsibility to their fellow man,
despite the current myriad attempts to convince otherwise.

It's a personal, morality based choice .... not a politically derived
directive.

Eisboch


I don't read or see much of "hard core Conservatives" engaging in
discussions or activities aimed at fulfilling "one's sense of
responsibility to their fellow man." I won't disagree that in times gone
by, pre-Reagan, many Republicans were involved in activities to help the
less fortunate. Nowadays, not so much.

Responsibility to fellow man means a hand up, not a hand out.

Fleabeggars want hand outs not hand ups.

Simple, let the fleabeggars soften up and get some humility, when they
are ready to fix their problems the problem will be solved.
--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs. But
we have big huge government we can't afford...
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude