On 2/2/14, 9:05 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 08:28:57 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:




I think it is reasonable to attack an idea you don't like, but I don't
see where it is necessary to attack the person *here* who posted the
idea you don't like.

Fine, attack an idea. If I post something that is ****, attack that post also. I don't give a rat's
butt. If it's ****, and I posted it, then I deserve the attack.



I might attack an idea you posted, but I'm not going to engage in
calling you names because you posted it.




You seem to be admitting defeat, and stating you cannot control
your temper and engage in adult-level conversation without engaging in
personal insults.

Seem? Are you pretending to be your wife now, with a touch of psychoanalysis?


It's called being polite.




As for *your* country...it is *my* country, too, and I would like my
country to do a better job of what most people would find important.

Then treat your country with some respect. It does a hell of a lot better than 90% of the other
countries in the world. Don't denigrate the entire country based on a one-sided view of a problem.

There are what, 200 or so countries in the world? So, 20 of them do a
better job in terms of what most people find important? Actually, I
suspect the number of countries doing better might be higher in some
categories that are really important. Perhaps if we cut back drastically
on military spending, we can address some other really important issues.






Oh, and I shall continue to not engage in personally insulting other
posters here, and simply observe the hypocrisy of "the right."

Good. That's suitable. Remember, when you proudly announce the members of your 'bozo bin' along with
the 'reasons' for entry thereto, you're insulting those folks also.


The inmates of my bozo bin aren't there because of their politics,
they're in there because they can't behave reasonably here and cannot
post without insulting others.

--
There’s no point crying over spilled 4-Methylcyclohexanemethanol.

On 2/2/2014 12:30 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 18:00:23 -0600, Califbill
wrote:

"F.O.A.D." wrote:
On 2/1/14, 6:32 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 2/1/2014 6:08 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/1/14, 5:59 PM, Tim wrote:
On Saturday, February 1, 2014 8:05:54 AM UTC-6, F.O.A.D. wrote:


What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone

because they get sick? What a wonderful country.


What does the wrong doing of company have to do with this country?
Does she not have a legal team working on the situation? The article
says she does...


In most more rational western countries, the woman wouldn't have been
fired because she took ill, because her health insurance would not have
been something supplied via her employer. But that's the way we allow it
to be in this country...fired because you got sick and might impact the
company's health insurance premiums. *That* is sick.



Was that the reason she was fired? I don't know because her lawsuit
hasn't hit the courts yet and we haven't heard what the company has to say.

That said though, I agree, it's yet another example of why businesses
making widgets shouldn't be the provider or even administrator of health
insurance plans. Government passing laws that force businesses to
retain employees even as the health insurance premiums rise
exponentially isn't doing anything to help anybody.


Indeed, health insurance should not be subject to the employer's whim.
Neither should defined benefit pensions. Too many workers have been
screwed out of pensions because their employers used the funds for
something else or allowed unfunded liabilities to skyrocket.





Sort of like the unfunded public pensions? How many cities have or are
going to declare bankruptcy over unfunded liabilities?

Good point, there are far more unfunded government pensions than
private sector pensions. The biggest one is Social Security

What happened to the social security *trust fund*

On 2/2/2014 7:50 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
Perhaps we can add "Americans who get sick" to the list of groups and
concepts upon which Republicans are making war...let's see...women,
gays, latinos, people who have sex, blacks, peace, students, the poor,
the middle class, non-christians, immigrants. the environment, the
unemployed...I'm sure there are more.

Here's something to think about:

You should start thinking too. It would do you a world of good

Many studies have shown that abortion rates drop dramatically when
contraception is free and easily accessible.

Poverty rates drop dramatically when money is free and easily accessible.

So, why do so many self-described pro-lifers oppose
free and accessible birth control?

For some it's a religious issue. Others believe it's an area that that
the govt. has no jurisdiction over. Free and accessible birth control is
fine so long as tax payers are not burdened with paying for it.
I'm sure you'd be willing to help fund the effort if you had a chance to
put your money where your mouth is.

Is the answer that they really do not care about babies but, rather,
they want to punish women for having sex, even forced sex?

No. Try again. Think harder this time.

The Republican war on women is real and happening now.

please explain. This might take some time to wrap your head around it,
so think it over and give us a rational answer when you are ready.


--
There’s no point crying over spilled 4-Methylcyclohexanemethanol.

On 2/2/2014 2:47 AM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 21:09:54 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

I'm not engaging in personal insults against other posters here. You
are. Period. It's perfectly within your rights to not like my political
opinions, as it is within my rights to not like your political opinions.
No need to make it personal.

===

You engaged in a personal insult against our country. That is quite a
different matter than expressing a political opinion. As I and
others have pointed out, there was no logic to your statement, just
anti-establishment, emotional rhetoric.

Now go FOAD, right after you pay your taxes and creditors.

He'd ESAD before he'd pay his financial and societal debts.

On 2/2/2014 8:04 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 21:09:54 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 9:08 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 17:30:14 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 4:53 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 09:05:54 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 8:38 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 21:06:03 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/mntn3y7

I can think of only two people who would use that story to indict the USA.



What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone
because they get sick? What a wonderful country.

A person got fired - justly or unjustly. If justly, the country did nothing wrong. If unjustly, then
the employer is at fault. How do you possibly get off indicting the USA for this action?

I really can't understand why anyone responds to any of your ****.



There you go again, with the personal insults.

Read what you wrote. What you wrote was an indictment of America based on what one woman gave as her
side of a story.

It was ****. We've all written some **** in our time. That happened to be an example of yours.


I'm not engaging in personal insults against other posters here. You
are. Period. It's perfectly within your rights to not like my political
opinions, as it is within my rights to not like your political opinions.
No need to make it personal.

Horse manure. A journalist who writes **** should expect to face the consequences. Seems like that
happened fairly recently. Both Lara Logan and David Kilpatrick wrote some ****. Logan got fired.
Kilpatrick was simply supporting a liberal newspaper which revels in lies.

Both wrote ****, which is what you did. I suppose you feel insulted, but on the other hand, I live
in the country you continuously insult.

What did Lara do? I thought she was a good, honest, and brave reporter.

On 2/2/2014 8:28 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 2/2/14, 8:04 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 21:09:54 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 9:08 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 17:30:14 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 4:53 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 09:05:54 -0500, "F.O.A.D."
wrote:

On 2/1/14, 8:38 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 21:06:03 -0500, "F.O.A.D."
wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/mntn3y7

I can think of only two people who would use that story to
indict the USA.



What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire
someone
because they get sick? What a wonderful country.

A person got fired - justly or unjustly. If justly, the country
did nothing wrong. If unjustly, then
the employer is at fault. How do you possibly get off indicting
the USA for this action?

I really can't understand why anyone responds to any of your ****.



There you go again, with the personal insults.

Read what you wrote. What you wrote was an indictment of America
based on what one woman gave as her
side of a story.

It was ****. We've all written some **** in our time. That happened
to be an example of yours.


I'm not engaging in personal insults against other posters here. You
are. Period. It's perfectly within your rights to not like my political
opinions, as it is within my rights to not like your political opinions.
No need to make it personal.

Horse manure. A journalist who writes **** should expect to face the
consequences. Seems like that
happened fairly recently. Both Lara Logan and David Kilpatrick wrote
some ****. Logan got fired.
Kilpatrick was simply supporting a liberal newspaper which revels in
lies.

Both wrote ****, which is what you did. I suppose you feel insulted,
but on the other hand, I live
in the country you continuously insult.



I think it is reasonable to attack an idea you don't like, but I don't
see where it is necessary to attack the person *here* who posted the
idea you don't like.

You seem to be admitting defeat, and stating you cannot control
your temper and engage in adult-level conversation without engaging in
personal insults.

I had a feeling the righties who post here would not be able to control
their tempers and would engage in personal insulting even if the usual
"object" of their hatred (me, of course ) refrained from those same
sort of personal insults. Thank you for proving me correct. At least a
half dozen of you righties, many of whom complain about the "tone" in
rec.boats, are perpetuating the tone you claim you don't like.

This, by the way, is not a venue of journalism in which people who are
paid to write are paid for what they write here, so therefore I think
your attempts to make comparisons to Ms. Logan or Mr. Kilpatrick (never
heard of him, actually) are invalid.

As for *your* country...it is *my* country, too, and I would like my
country to do a better job of what most people would find important.

Oh, and I shall continue to not engage in personally insulting other
posters here, and simply observe the hypocrisy of "the right."

As always, have a wonderfully terrific day.




I guess we'll have to learn to live with our rotten apple until it rots
away. (Evidence the improvement of the tone of this newsgroup while you
were away)

On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 09:19:17 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/2/14, 9:05 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 08:28:57 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:




I think it is reasonable to attack an idea you don't like, but I don't
see where it is necessary to attack the person *here* who posted the
idea you don't like.

Fine, attack an idea. If I post something that is ****, attack that post also. I don't give a rat's
butt. If it's ****, and I posted it, then I deserve the attack.



I might attack an idea you posted, but I'm not going to engage in
calling you names because you posted it.

Did I call you a name? If so I apologize for name-calling. On the other hand, if I called something
you wrote '****', then that's an appropriate comment.




You seem to be admitting defeat, and stating you cannot control
your temper and engage in adult-level conversation without engaging in
personal insults.

Seem? Are you pretending to be your wife now, with a touch of psychoanalysis?


It's called being polite.

I suppose your demeaning comments were delivered in a very polite way.


As for *your* country...it is *my* country, too, and I would like my
country to do a better job of what most people would find important.

Then treat your country with some respect. It does a hell of a lot better than 90% of the other
countries in the world. Don't denigrate the entire country based on a one-sided view of a problem.

There are what, 200 or so countries in the world? So, 20 of them do a
better job in terms of what most people find important? Actually, I
suspect the number of countries doing better might be higher in some
categories that are really important. Perhaps if we cut back drastically
on military spending, we can address some other really important issues.

Fine. Argue that point. Don't denigrate the country because some lady bitched to the news,
especially when you've heard only one side of the story.

Oh, and I shall continue to not engage in personally insulting other
posters here, and simply observe the hypocrisy of "the right."

Good. That's suitable. Remember, when you proudly announce the members of your 'bozo bin' along with
the 'reasons' for entry thereto, you're insulting those folks also.


The inmates of my bozo bin aren't there because of their politics,
they're in there because they can't behave reasonably here and cannot
post without insulting others.

We each have our definition of reasonable behavior. You find my calling your comment '****' to be
unreasonable. I find it very appropriate. Your accusations are, in fact, personal insults. You could
easily filter the individuals whose comments offend you *without* the announcements and personal
insults. True or false?

Is there some reason you continuously 'inform' us of whom you've filtered and your rationale for
doing so? Do you believe someone here gives a ****?

On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 09:55:50 -0500, Hank wrote:

On 2/2/2014 7:50 AM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
Perhaps we can add "Americans who get sick" to the list of groups and
concepts upon which Republicans are making war...let's see...women,
gays, latinos, people who have sex, blacks, peace, students, the poor,
the middle class, non-christians, immigrants. the environment, the
unemployed...I'm sure there are more.

Here's something to think about:

You should start thinking too. It would do you a world of good

Many studies have shown that abortion rates drop dramatically when
contraception is free and easily accessible.

Poverty rates drop dramatically when money is free and easily accessible.

So, why do so many self-described pro-lifers oppose
free and accessible birth control?

For some it's a religious issue. Others believe it's an area that that
the govt. has no jurisdiction over. Free and accessible birth control is
fine so long as tax payers are not burdened with paying for it.
I'm sure you'd be willing to help fund the effort if you had a chance to
put your money where your mouth is.

Is the answer that they really do not care about babies but, rather,
they want to punish women for having sex, even forced sex?

No. Try again. Think harder this time.

The Republican war on women is real and happening now.

please explain. This might take some time to wrap your head around it,
so think it over and give us a rational answer when you are ready.


Yup.

On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 10:03:33 -0500, Hank wrote:

On 2/2/2014 8:04 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 21:09:54 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 9:08 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 17:30:14 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 4:53 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 09:05:54 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 8:38 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 21:06:03 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/mntn3y7

I can think of only two people who would use that story to indict the USA.



What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone
because they get sick? What a wonderful country.

A person got fired - justly or unjustly. If justly, the country did nothing wrong. If unjustly, then
the employer is at fault. How do you possibly get off indicting the USA for this action?

I really can't understand why anyone responds to any of your ****.



There you go again, with the personal insults.

Read what you wrote. What you wrote was an indictment of America based on what one woman gave as her
side of a story.

It was ****. We've all written some **** in our time. That happened to be an example of yours.


I'm not engaging in personal insults against other posters here. You
are. Period. It's perfectly within your rights to not like my political
opinions, as it is within my rights to not like your political opinions.
No need to make it personal.

Horse manure. A journalist who writes **** should expect to face the consequences. Seems like that
happened fairly recently. Both Lara Logan and David Kilpatrick wrote some ****. Logan got fired.
Kilpatrick was simply supporting a liberal newspaper which revels in lies.

Both wrote ****, which is what you did. I suppose you feel insulted, but on the other hand, I live
in the country you continuously insult.

What did Lara do? I thought she was a good, honest, and brave reporter.

She made a mistake when reporting on Benghazi which ****ed off the White House and was suspended.
Kirkpatrick's story was also found to be bull****, but it supported the administration, so nothing
happened to him. After all, what is the New York Times if not a liberal mouthpiece.

On Sun, 02 Feb 2014 10:03:33 -0500, Hank wrote:

On 2/2/2014 8:04 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 21:09:54 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 9:08 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 17:30:14 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 4:53 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 01 Feb 2014 09:05:54 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 2/1/14, 8:38 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 31 Jan 2014 21:06:03 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/mntn3y7

I can think of only two people who would use that story to indict the USA.



What, that we have a country that allows corporations to fire someone
because they get sick? What a wonderful country.

A person got fired - justly or unjustly. If justly, the country did nothing wrong. If unjustly, then
the employer is at fault. How do you possibly get off indicting the USA for this action?

I really can't understand why anyone responds to any of your ****.



There you go again, with the personal insults.

Read what you wrote. What you wrote was an indictment of America based on what one woman gave as her
side of a story.

It was ****. We've all written some **** in our time. That happened to be an example of yours.


I'm not engaging in personal insults against other posters here. You
are. Period. It's perfectly within your rights to not like my political
opinions, as it is within my rights to not like your political opinions.
No need to make it personal.

Horse manure. A journalist who writes **** should expect to face the consequences. Seems like that
happened fairly recently. Both Lara Logan and David Kilpatrick wrote some ****. Logan got fired.
Kilpatrick was simply supporting a liberal newspaper which revels in lies.

Both wrote ****, which is what you did. I suppose you feel insulted, but on the other hand, I live
in the country you continuously insult.

What did Lara do? I thought she was a good, honest, and brave reporter.

Oh, forgot this. The Canadians seem to have a handle on it:

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/60868