GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

What a farce.

Winners: All of the GOP candidates.

Losers: Pretty much all of the CNBC moderators and questioners.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/29/15 4:35 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
What a farce.

Winners: All of the GOP candidates.

Losers: Pretty much all of the CNBC moderators and questioners.


I watched some of the GOPer “debate� last night, and have a few impressions:


(1) The candidates said whatever they chose to, often with no connection
to the questions. The moderators were weaklings and had no control over
the debate.

(2) The GOPers believe Hillary is worse than Hitler, Stalin, Typhoid,
the Huns and ISIS combined. and so is the media. In a properly moderated
debate, Hillary would mop the floor with any of them.

(3) The GOPers believe the federal government should be abolished.

(4) Christie seemed surprisingly coherent and forceful. His remark about
the government not getting involved in fantasy sports betting was a
crowd pleaser. He'd be tougher on overpriced medicine than Benjy would.

(5) Donald seemed to be out of energy but made funny faces when others
spoke. He loves guns, has at least one and thinks casino employees and
gamblers should pack heat. He likes to be unpredictable.

(6) Jeb seemed like he walked into the wrong wedding at a catering hall
and had to act like he belonged there. His tie was a mess.

(7) Carly is a deceptive, ego maniacal piece of ****.

(8) Cruz is an evil, ego maniacal piece of **** who bragged about
leading the battle against Planned Parenthood.

(9) Huck is merely a schmuck, but got laughs pointing out that he was
wearing a Trump tie, but did not know where it was made. He bragged
about fighting the Clintons for decades.

(10) Rand is in a world of his own, perhaps on another planet.

(11) So is Benjy, but a different world than Rand. He reminded me of
perpetually shell-shocked Dan Quayle. He doesn’t know anything. Literally.

(12) Rubio thinks he should should be America's Idol.

(13) Kasich is too rational to be a Republican.

(14) GOPers believe Democrats are commie cannibals who will eat your babies.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/29/2015 7:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
(7) Carly is a deceptive, ego maniacal piece of ****.

(8) Cruz is an evil, ego maniacal piece of **** who bragged about
leading the battle against Planned Parenthood.

Would you mind if I appended your list?

(8A) Hillery is an evil, ego maniacal, deceptive, POS who bragged about
dodging bullets while disembarking from a helicopter in an obviously
staged media event, in some ******** in the middle east.

You share some of her attributes, so maybe that's why you are so
mesmerized by her.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 07:51:48 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

(14) GOPers believe Democrats are commie cannibals who will eat your babies.

No just kill them ;-)

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 07:51:48 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:


(14) GOPers believe Democrats are commie cannibals who will eat your babies.

.... kill them and sell off the parts ;-)

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/29/2015 7:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 10/29/15 4:35 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
What a farce.

Winners: All of the GOP candidates.

Losers: Pretty much all of the CNBC moderators and questioners.


I watched some of the GOPer “debate� last night, and have a few
impressions:


(1) The candidates said whatever they chose to, often with no connection
to the questions. The moderators were weaklings and had no control over
the debate.

(2) The GOPers believe Hillary is worse than Hitler, Stalin, Typhoid,
the Huns and ISIS combined. and so is the media. In a properly moderated
debate, Hillary would mop the floor with any of them.

(3) The GOPers believe the federal government should be abolished.

(4) Christie seemed surprisingly coherent and forceful. His remark about
the government not getting involved in fantasy sports betting was a
crowd pleaser. He'd be tougher on overpriced medicine than Benjy would.

(5) Donald seemed to be out of energy but made funny faces when others
spoke. He loves guns, has at least one and thinks casino employees and
gamblers should pack heat. He likes to be unpredictable.

(6) Jeb seemed like he walked into the wrong wedding at a catering hall
and had to act like he belonged there. His tie was a mess.

(7) Carly is a deceptive, ego maniacal piece of ****.

(8) Cruz is an evil, ego maniacal piece of **** who bragged about
leading the battle against Planned Parenthood.

(9) Huck is merely a schmuck, but got laughs pointing out that he was
wearing a Trump tie, but did not know where it was made. He bragged
about fighting the Clintons for decades.

(10) Rand is in a world of his own, perhaps on another planet.

(11) So is Benjy, but a different world than Rand. He reminded me of
perpetually shell-shocked Dan Quayle. He doesn’t know anything. Literally.

(12) Rubio thinks he should should be America's Idol.

(13) Kasich is too rational to be a Republican.

(14) GOPers believe Democrats are commie cannibals who will eat your
babies.



I got a kick out of Huckabee's "plan" to solve rising medical care costs.

Discover a cure for cancer, diabetes and heart disease. Simple.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/29/15 10:41 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/29/2015 7:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 10/29/15 4:35 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
What a farce.

Winners: All of the GOP candidates.

Losers: Pretty much all of the CNBC moderators and questioners.


I watched some of the GOPer “debate� last night, and have a few
impressions:


(1) The candidates said whatever they chose to, often with no connection
to the questions. The moderators were weaklings and had no control over
the debate.

(2) The GOPers believe Hillary is worse than Hitler, Stalin, Typhoid,
the Huns and ISIS combined. and so is the media. In a properly moderated
debate, Hillary would mop the floor with any of them.

(3) The GOPers believe the federal government should be abolished.

(4) Christie seemed surprisingly coherent and forceful. His remark about
the government not getting involved in fantasy sports betting was a
crowd pleaser. He'd be tougher on overpriced medicine than Benjy would.

(5) Donald seemed to be out of energy but made funny faces when others
spoke. He loves guns, has at least one and thinks casino employees and
gamblers should pack heat. He likes to be unpredictable.

(6) Jeb seemed like he walked into the wrong wedding at a catering hall
and had to act like he belonged there. His tie was a mess.

(7) Carly is a deceptive, ego maniacal piece of ****.

(8) Cruz is an evil, ego maniacal piece of **** who bragged about
leading the battle against Planned Parenthood.

(9) Huck is merely a schmuck, but got laughs pointing out that he was
wearing a Trump tie, but did not know where it was made. He bragged
about fighting the Clintons for decades.

(10) Rand is in a world of his own, perhaps on another planet.

(11) So is Benjy, but a different world than Rand. He reminded me of
perpetually shell-shocked Dan Quayle. He doesn’t know anything.
Literally.

(12) Rubio thinks he should should be America's Idol.

(13) Kasich is too rational to be a Republican.

(14) GOPers believe Democrats are commie cannibals who will eat your
babies.



I got a kick out of Huckabee's "plan" to solve rising medical care costs.

Discover a cure for cancer, diabetes and heart disease. Simple.


When you are a "Today's Republican" national office seeker, *everything*
is easy, at least for most of them.

What you see as candidates from the GOP is a direct result of the party
being taken over by the extreme *and* overly religious right wing, and I
mean extreme and overly religious. Ben Carson is leading in the Iowa and
perhaps other polls at the moment because he is soft-spoken and
perceived as closely aligned with evangelical christians, and they are a
huge percentage of the GOP base. They like him because of his religious
beliefs, and that is a ****-poor way to pick a POTUS. His lack of
knowledge is painful to watch.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/29/2015 9:12 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 07:51:48 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:
Democrats are commie cannibals who will eat your babies.

.... kill them and sell off the parts ;-)


Oh wait. The abortion mills are already doing that

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/29/2015 11:50 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
I ended up talking with a fellow in India whose English was just
abominable. The cleaning tool was $29.95, not a lot, but, screw them. If
I need help, I want someone on the other end of the phone who speaks
English at least as well as your average Kentuckian.
:)
Doesn't Apple offer a solution? I don't know why you allow windows
hardware in your home. Apple can emulate anything, or so I'm told.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 12:13:49 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:


Eliminating all tax breaks for corporations that export jobs sounds good
but is likely to be symbolic only in terms of a real affect. You'd have
to crunch all the numbers in terms of cost to manufacture here versus
there to find the point where it is economically more viable to
move jobs back to the USA. I suspect that gap is pretty large, even at
a higher tax rate.

It's interesting to me (not having much knowledge of world economics)
that the Republican positions and Democrat positions can be so
diametrically opposed. Democrats want to punish businesses for
choosing the most effective way to produce products, maximizing the
return on their shareholder's investments. They think that by increasing
the punishment (more taxes or no tax breaks) it will force businesses to
comply with their wishes and cause the economy to prosper.
Republicans say just the opposite. They want to reduce taxes on
businesses as a means to promote expansion, creation of new jobs and to
keep manufacturing here in a fertile economic environment.

I'd have to go along with the GOP ideas on this one. The Democrat's
way is the tail wagging the dog, IMO. Again, the amount of additional
revenues generated by tax "punishments" doesn't amount to a hill of
beans when compared to those revenues generated by a growing, healthy
and gainfully employed middle class paying normal income taxes.


Liberals still believe corporations pay taxes. In fact it is their
customers who pay the tax and taxing a corporation only makes them the
tax collector for the government. They make a profit on that tax since
it gets rolled into the expense line.
I suppose the corporations could list the tax as a separate line item
in the price of their products like they do with sales taxes but then
it would be harder to make a profit on it.

I doubt the public would be happy if they bought a TV and the receipt
said

***********
TV $549
Federal Tariff $300
(about what it would cost extra to make it competive in a US factory)
Sub total $849

State sales tax $50.94 (at 6%)

Total $899.94

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 12:29:53 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:


You're taking it a lot farther than I am. I simply don't believe that
U.S. corporations that export jobs should get tax breaks. My
"experience" last night with the tech company that has its "help desk"
in India is a perfect example. Why should that company get tax breaks
(assuming it does) if it is hiring people in an underdeveloped country
at very low wages to provide lousy tech support for American customers?


I am not sure exactly what the tax break would be. They use off shore
tech support, simply because it is cheap.
I really avoid tech support altogether since they seldom ever tell me
anything I can't find on the net and it is just a hassle I don't need
in my day.

What "cleaner" did you think you needed in the first place?
If it is just adware, try JRT, now part of Malwarebytes.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 13:01:27 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Maybe I am but wouldn't it be nice to have more products say "Made in
the USA" on them?

It's only money. If we were willing to pay more, they would make more
here. Unfortunately most people are not willing to pay more.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 13:16:21 -0400, wrote:

If you really want something to keep you up at night, you should be
worrying that our loose fiscal policies will cause loss in faith in
the dollar and perhaps the end of the dollar being the world's reserve
currency. That could make our economy unstable and make most of the
promises from the government, not much more than love letters in the
sand.
It is certainly as worrying as global warming.

===

More worrying in my opinion. The effects of global warming are still
a ways out, maybe 50 to 100 years if at all.

A currency crisis could happen next week , next month or next year.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

wrote:
On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 13:01:27 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

Maybe I am but wouldn't it be nice to have more products say "Made in
the USA" on them?

It's only money. If we were willing to pay more, they would make more
here. Unfortunately most people are not willing to pay more.


Minimum wage is a guarantee of offshoring jobs. Make sure we are
overpriced.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/29/2015 2:29 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 10/29/15 1:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

Maybe I am but wouldn't it be nice to have more products say "Made in
the USA" on them? Either that or maybe you should take some courses in
basic Hindi. :-)







Sure, it would be nice.

Do I detect a note of hopelessness?

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/29/15 6:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/29/2015 2:29 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 10/29/15 1:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

Maybe I am but wouldn't it be nice to have more products say "Made in
the USA" on them? Either that or maybe you should take some courses in
basic Hindi. :-)







Sure, it would be nice.

Do I detect a note of hopelessness?



So long as this country is ruled by corporationists, we're not going to
get anywhere.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

Justan Olphart wrote:
On 10/29/2015 7:51 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
(7) Carly is a deceptive, ego maniacal piece of ****.

(8) Cruz is an evil, ego maniacal piece of **** who bragged about
leading the battle against Planned Parenthood.

Would you mind if I appended your list?

(8A) Hillery is an evil, ego maniacal, deceptive, POS who bragged
about dodging bullets while disembarking from a helicopter in an
obviously staged media event, in some ******** in the middle east.

You share some of her attributes, so maybe that's why you are so
mesmerized by her.


True.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 19:46:41 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 10/29/15 6:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/29/2015 2:29 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 10/29/15 1:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

Maybe I am but wouldn't it be nice to have more products say "Made in
the USA" on them? Either that or maybe you should take some courses in
basic Hindi. :-)







Sure, it would be nice.

Do I detect a note of hopelessness?



So long as this country is ruled by corporationists, we're not going to
get anywhere.

That ultimately still gets back to the consumer. As long as people are
willing to camp out in front of a store for days, just to save $100 on
a TV, we are not going to get away from the economy of scale that
makes big conglomerates successful.
If nothing else, I would like to see anti trust legislation passed and
enforced. (and you think I am a corporations uber alles libertarian)

If we had not broken up the phone company we would not have an
internet and if that shot was not fired across IBM's bow we would not
have the PC as we know it.

Does anyone think beer will be improved or even made cheaper when A/B
owns Miller?

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/29/2015 7:46 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 10/29/15 6:51 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/29/2015 2:29 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 10/29/15 1:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

Maybe I am but wouldn't it be nice to have more products say "Made in
the USA" on them? Either that or maybe you should take some
courses in
basic Hindi. :-)







Sure, it would be nice.

Do I detect a note of hopelessness?



So long as this country is ruled by corporationists, we're not going to
get anywhere.


It has *always* been run by corporationists. It's what made the USA
number one in the world for a very long time.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 20:19:02 -0400, wrote:

If we had not broken up the phone company we would not have an
internet and if that shot was not fired across IBM's bow we would not
have the PC as we know it.

===

The old Bell System phone companies fought successfull for years to
keep other devices from attaching to their wires. Those were the days
when a 1200 baud modem was considered high speed and cost over a
thousand dollars. Only the most visionary could concieve of an
internet like structure even though a lot of the technology came out
of Bell Labs.

IBM was not forced into the PC business by the threat of anti trust
however. That threat had far more impact on mainframe hardware and
software. IBM's PC was more of a response to the possible loss of
account control posed by the Apple II computer and the VisiCalc
spreadsheet application. IBM marketing reps were walking into
customer offices, seeing the proliferation of Apple 2s, spreadsheets,
word processors, etc., and recognizing the threat to their business
model and customer relationships. In the end they lost that segment
of the business anyway but not before the Intel/Microsoft platform had
become an industry standard.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 20:40:46 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I suspect the made in China outlet strips you saw at Lowe's are probably
fine, quality-wise, and I'll bet they are UL approved.

The problem with China is not quality, it is quality control. A lot of
items get loose that are defective, whether they are copies of good
products or just factory rejects that get mixed back into the supply
chain along the way.

"Listing marks" are quite frequently counterfeited too.

A big company like Lowes might be more careful than mom and pop but it
still happens. If you see something at a flea market on a mom and pop
dollar store, the U/L label is almost always bogus.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 21:37:50 -0400,
wrote:

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 20:19:02 -0400, wrote:

If we had not broken up the phone company we would not have an
internet and if that shot was not fired across IBM's bow we would not
have the PC as we know it.

===

The old Bell System phone companies fought successfull for years to
keep other devices from attaching to their wires. Those were the days
when a 1200 baud modem was considered high speed and cost over a
thousand dollars. Only the most visionary could concieve of an
internet like structure even though a lot of the technology came out
of Bell Labs.

The problem was that without the breaking up of Ma Bell, Hayes would
have never been able to sell a cheap modem to the public.


IBM was not forced into the PC business by the threat of anti trust
however.

The anti trust threat assured the PC was open architecture hardware
and unbundled software. Without everything would be like Apple and
innovation would have stopped with the Lisa.

That threat had far more impact on mainframe hardware and
software. IBM's PC was more of a response to the possible loss of
account control posed by the Apple II computer and the VisiCalc
spreadsheet application.

You are right
Visicalc was on the PC-1 (1980) and was the first killer app for
business PCs. It did not take long to push Apple out of the way in
offices because the open architecture hardware and software made
innovation blossom

IBM marketing reps were walking into
customer offices, seeing the proliferation of Apple 2s, spreadsheets,
word processors, etc., and recognizing the threat to their business
model and customer relationships. In the end they lost that segment
of the business anyway but not before the Intel/Microsoft platform had
become an industry standard.

The big difference was IBM was selling integrated systems where your
desktop PC was connected to your mainframe.

And Hilliary Clinton is a proven liar and she has blood on her hands over her refusal to increase security in Benghazi.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/30/15 2:05 AM, RGrew176 wrote:
And Hilliary Clinton is a proven liar and she has blood on her hands
over her refusal to increase security in Benghazi.





Eight Congressional hearings, including mostly adversarial,
prosecutorial ones, such as the one in which Mrs. Clinton just
testified, brought forth no evidence of that, but, hey, when you live in
the right-wing bubble, facts don't matter, eh?

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Friday, October 30, 2015 at 6:47:26 AM UTC-4, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 10/30/15 2:05 AM, RGrew176 wrote:
And Hilliary Clinton is a proven liar and she has blood on her hands
over her refusal to increase security in Benghazi.





Eight Congressional hearings, including mostly adversarial,
prosecutorial ones, such as the one in which Mrs. Clinton just
testified, brought forth no evidence of that, but, hey, when you live in
the right-wing bubble, facts don't matter, eh?

"There are disagreements about whether State acted reasonably, but that it didn't honor requests for additional security is established fact," said Georgetown University adjunct assistant professor Daveed Gartenstein-Ross, who is also a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, which focuses on foreign policy and national security.

The State Department has acknowledged it rejected requests to provide more security personnel in Libya. It also acknowledged rejecting a request to erect guard towers at the Benghazi mission, but notes that a number of physical security upgrades, such as the installation of concrete barriers to block unused gates, were made during 2012.

The State Department's own Accountability Review Board concluded that the number of diplomatic security staff in Benghazi in the months leading up to the attacks was inadequate "despite repeated requests" from the Benghazi mission and the embassy in Tripoli for additional staffing.

The Benghazi facility had been projected to have five security agents and there had been multiple requests that five be placed there. But in the nine months before the attacks, the facility had a full complement of five agents on only 23 days.

After the State Department's security staff in Washington rejected the repeated requests, the post became resigned to not having the full complement of five agents and stopped making the requests, the review board found.

A bipartisan report by the Senate Intelligence Committee also found that the State Department headquarters did not grant Stevens' requests for more security personnel.

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

On. Her. Watch. Eh?

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 02:33:01 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Besides, UL is a safety rating, not a quality rating. An item can be UL approved and still be cheaply made.

Exactly. The NRTL "Listing" only says that it will burn up safely
(fire contained in the enclosure), not that it won't burn up.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:20:29 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

Sure, blame HRC for UN Resolution 1973.

The UN is the US (and the 4 other super members), Why don't you blame
the UN for Iraq too if you think not. That was the result of a UN
resolution too.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:42:55 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I seem to recall discussions during the hearing of the overthrow of
Gaddafi. I guess I've forgotten what "the plan" was to fill the power
vacuum in Iraq after the Bush/Cheney war.

*That* was the biggest error made by Bush and his administration. They
didn't anticipate a power vacuum. They planned and called for free
elections allowing the people of Iraq to democratically choose their
leadership like the rest of the civilized, free world.

That is the flaw in our thinking. We tend to assume these 3d world
countries are "civilized" and just waiting for a Jeffersonian
democracy to be offered to them.
They are ruled by dictators because that is the only form of
government that can control them. Without that single point of
control, they quickly dissolve into a warring rabble of feuding tribes
and cults with 1000 year old conflicts.

If the west would just leave them alone to kill each other, they would
leave us alone. You notice, we don't see a lot of terrorism here
coming from central Africa. That is because we are not spending a lot
of time there meddling in their civil wars. They are more interested
in "death to that guy down the road" than "death to America".

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/30/2015 1:05 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:42:55 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I seem to recall discussions during the hearing of the overthrow of
Gaddafi. I guess I've forgotten what "the plan" was to fill the power
vacuum in Iraq after the Bush/Cheney war.

*That* was the biggest error made by Bush and his administration. They
didn't anticipate a power vacuum. They planned and called for free
elections allowing the people of Iraq to democratically choose their
leadership like the rest of the civilized, free world.

That is the flaw in our thinking. We tend to assume these 3d world
countries are "civilized" and just waiting for a Jeffersonian
democracy to be offered to them.
They are ruled by dictators because that is the only form of
government that can control them. Without that single point of
control, they quickly dissolve into a warring rabble of feuding tribes
and cults with 1000 year old conflicts.

If the west would just leave them alone to kill each other, they would
leave us alone. You notice, we don't see a lot of terrorism here
coming from central Africa. That is because we are not spending a lot
of time there meddling in their civil wars. They are more interested
in "death to that guy down the road" than "death to America".



Problem is, historically the USA does not tend to "ignore" barbaric
dictatorships that kill hundreds or thousands of their own citizens
in order to maintain power. It's a damned if you do, damned if you
don't situation. It doesn't sit well in people's minds when we ignore
pleas for help by people being systematically exterminated.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/30/2015 1:17 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/30/2015 1:05 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:42:55 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I seem to recall discussions during the hearing of the overthrow of
Gaddafi. I guess I've forgotten what "the plan" was to fill the power
vacuum in Iraq after the Bush/Cheney war.

*That* was the biggest error made by Bush and his administration. They
didn't anticipate a power vacuum. They planned and called for free
elections allowing the people of Iraq to democratically choose their
leadership like the rest of the civilized, free world.

That is the flaw in our thinking. We tend to assume these 3d world
countries are "civilized" and just waiting for a Jeffersonian
democracy to be offered to them.
They are ruled by dictators because that is the only form of
government that can control them. Without that single point of
control, they quickly dissolve into a warring rabble of feuding tribes
and cults with 1000 year old conflicts.

If the west would just leave them alone to kill each other, they would
leave us alone. You notice, we don't see a lot of terrorism here
coming from central Africa. That is because we are not spending a lot
of time there meddling in their civil wars. They are more interested
in "death to that guy down the road" than "death to America".



Problem is, historically the USA does not tend to "ignore" barbaric
dictatorships that kill hundreds or thousands of their own citizens
in order to maintain power. It's a damned if you do, damned if you
don't situation. It doesn't sit well in people's minds when we ignore
pleas for help by people being systematically exterminated.


We need to take baby steps. Teach them to use toilet paper first.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:53:39 -0400, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 10/30/2015 12:46 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 10/30/15 12:31 PM, wrote:

Most of what you consider the "iraq war" was actually trying to
establish a functional government there. If we had simply taken down
Saddam and left, the US death toll would have been a couple hundred,
not thousands.

The reality is that we should have left in 1991. In retrospect, Saddam
was never a threat to the US. Getting the troops out of Saudi Arabia
would have prevented BOTH WTC attacks and all of the problems since
... at least for the US. (No Iraq, no Afghanistan, no USS Cole).


I concur.

Now that that's settled, What about Syria?

Let Putin deal with them. Let him greet his boys coming home in body
bags at the airport.
Even the Israelis are starting to come around to the idea that there
are far worse things than Assad.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

In article ou773b5kiuk67si9evuqso9ddovvqhjtrh@
4ax.com, says...

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:20:29 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

Sure, blame HRC for UN Resolution 1973.

The UN is the US (and the 4 other super members), Why don't you blame
the UN for Iraq too if you think not. That was the result of a UN
resolution too.

No, it wasn't. In fact, the UN Secretary General
called our invasion of Iraq "illegal".
OTOH, Resolution 1973 called for no-fly zones over
Libya and the use of all force necessary to protect
the civilian population.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:17:46 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 10/30/2015 1:05 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:42:55 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

I seem to recall discussions during the hearing of the overthrow of
Gaddafi. I guess I've forgotten what "the plan" was to fill the power
vacuum in Iraq after the Bush/Cheney war.

*That* was the biggest error made by Bush and his administration. They
didn't anticipate a power vacuum. They planned and called for free
elections allowing the people of Iraq to democratically choose their
leadership like the rest of the civilized, free world.

That is the flaw in our thinking. We tend to assume these 3d world
countries are "civilized" and just waiting for a Jeffersonian
democracy to be offered to them.
They are ruled by dictators because that is the only form of
government that can control them. Without that single point of
control, they quickly dissolve into a warring rabble of feuding tribes
and cults with 1000 year old conflicts.

If the west would just leave them alone to kill each other, they would
leave us alone. You notice, we don't see a lot of terrorism here
coming from central Africa. That is because we are not spending a lot
of time there meddling in their civil wars. They are more interested
in "death to that guy down the road" than "death to America".



Problem is, historically the USA does not tend to "ignore" barbaric
dictatorships that kill hundreds or thousands of their own citizens
in order to maintain power. It's a damned if you do, damned if you
don't situation. It doesn't sit well in people's minds when we ignore
pleas for help by people being systematically exterminated.


I think it may be a policy we need to reevaluate. Before we jump in
and topple a stable government, we should take a long hard look at
exactly who is asking for help and what the chances are that they are
simply religious fanatics who will immediately turn on us.

Hitler may be the last dictator we toppled that actually worked out
well for us or the country he ruled and this was Europe, a place we
understand.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:21:32 -0400, Justan Olphart
wrote:

We need to take baby steps. Teach them to use toilet paper first.

Typical answer. I bet the Koch brothers put you up to that.

"Make the world safe for Angel Soft and Quilted Northern" ;-)

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 13:00:03 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ou773b5kiuk67si9evuqso9ddovvqhjtrh@
4ax.com, says...

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 11:20:29 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

Sure, blame HRC for UN Resolution 1973.

The UN is the US (and the 4 other super members), Why don't you blame
the UN for Iraq too if you think not. That was the result of a UN
resolution too.

No, it wasn't. In fact, the UN Secretary General
called our invasion of Iraq "illegal".

They never bothered to repeal the resolutions that justified it tho.

OTOH, Resolution 1973 called for no-fly zones over
Libya and the use of all force necessary to protect
the civilian population.

Somehow that morphed into air support for the forces taking down
Q'daffy

The fact remains that without the US and a couple of other English
speaking countries, the UN is just a debating club.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On 10/30/2015 1:56 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:53:39 -0400, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 10/30/2015 12:46 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 10/30/15 12:31 PM, wrote:

Most of what you consider the "iraq war" was actually trying to
establish a functional government there. If we had simply taken down
Saddam and left, the US death toll would have been a couple hundred,
not thousands.

The reality is that we should have left in 1991. In retrospect, Saddam
was never a threat to the US. Getting the troops out of Saudi Arabia
would have prevented BOTH WTC attacks and all of the problems since
... at least for the US. (No Iraq, no Afghanistan, no USS Cole).


I concur.

Now that that's settled, What about Syria?

Let Putin deal with them. Let him greet his boys coming home in body
bags at the airport.
Even the Israelis are starting to come around to the idea that there
are far worse things than Assad.


You need to convince your leader.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 14:38:05 -0400, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 10/30/2015 1:56 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 12:53:39 -0400, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 10/30/2015 12:46 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 10/30/15 12:31 PM, wrote:

Most of what you consider the "iraq war" was actually trying to
establish a functional government there. If we had simply taken down
Saddam and left, the US death toll would have been a couple hundred,
not thousands.

The reality is that we should have left in 1991. In retrospect, Saddam
was never a threat to the US. Getting the troops out of Saudi Arabia
would have prevented BOTH WTC attacks and all of the problems since
... at least for the US. (No Iraq, no Afghanistan, no USS Cole).


I concur.

Now that that's settled, What about Syria?

Let Putin deal with them. Let him greet his boys coming home in body
bags at the airport.
Even the Israelis are starting to come around to the idea that there
are far worse things than Assad.


You need to convince your leader.

I didn't vote for any of the "leaders" (winning President) since
Reagan.

GOP debate .. winners ... losers
 

Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/29/2015 7:34 PM, wrote:
On Thursday, October 29, 2015 at 6:51:36 PM UTC-4, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 10/29/2015 2:29 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 10/29/15 1:01 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:

Maybe I am but wouldn't it be nice to have more products say "Made in
the USA" on them? Either that or maybe you should take some
courses in
basic Hindi. :-)







Sure, it would be nice.

Do I detect a note of hopelessness?



Not too long ago, I went to Lowe's to buy some outlet strips. I
couldn't find anything that wasn't made in China. While I wanted
some high quality strips, there was nothing available but the cheap
junk. I was willing to pay more for better quality. It seems that
some enterprising companies would realize that there are consumers
that are willing to pay for quality, and while their market
penetration and product output would be small, they could make
money. It's frustrating.


I think it's a misnomer to assume that all Chinese made products are
sub-quality or "junk". There are plenty of examples of products made
in China that are of equal or even better quality compared to the same
product when it was made here in the USA. For example, I was just
looking at a space heater that I bought last year. It's a Honeywell
product, made in China, is UL tested and certified and is not anything
less in quality or performance than the same thing if it were made in
here.

There was a period of time, early on in the "invasion" of Chinese
manufactured products where quality or even adherence to any
established codes didn't exist. Remember the imported, made in China
sheet-rock that ended up having to be ripped out and replaced in new
construction? Or the problems with plastic bottles?

Over the years I think China has quickly learned and is producing
quality products that meet general code requirements. Once in a while
you'll find something made by a fly-by-night operation in China like the
stage lighting I bought on e-Bay a few years ago and was flabbergasted
by the crappy construction with weird electrical sockets and wiring
that were a hazard to operate. They quickly ended up busted up and
thrown in the dumpster.

There was also a period of time ... maybe it still exists ... that
because China does not recognize patents, trademarks or copyrights
of other nations, there were illegal (here) copies of Gibson and
Martin guitars being manufactured there. A guy showed up at my shop
a few years back. He had traveled to China on business and somehow
ran across an operation making Gibson electric guitar copies. He
bought 21 of them .... get this ... for about $1 each but paid a
hundred or so each to ship them to the USA. He brought some to the
shop trying to sell them to me. I was aware of the illegal copies
being brought to the states and knew how to determine that they were
fakes. It is illegal here to sell them, but I have to admit that
other than not being a "real" Gibson, they were of excellent quality
and workmanship.

I suspect the made in China outlet strips you saw at Lowe's are
probably fine, quality-wise, and I'll bet they are UL approved.


Many major US manufacturers have operations in China that they closely
oversee. They have a reputation to uphold.