|
OT Repubs against Fancy Book Learnin'
Down With Fancy Book Learnin'
What's it mean that the big cities and college towns of America all voted blue? By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist Friday, November 12, 2004 Printable Version Email This Article Mark Morford Archives Subscribe to Notes & Errata Who is this guy? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Down With Fancy Book Learnin' - What's it mean that the big citi... 11/12/2004 We Are All Dubya's Doormat - News flash for ordinary Repubs and ... 11/10/2004 Hello, Uranus? Got Any Room? - Must. Move. Away. Cannot endure m... 11/05/2004 Wallow In Chaos, And Laugh - A pro-Bush outcome and one enormous... 11/03/2004 Get Out And Vote And Scream - Now that we're all completely frie... 10/29/2004 Is this why everything's so mangled? Is this why we're so divided? Is this why we're so damned confused and bothered and itchy and wondering why we are ever at each others' throats and ever snickering in each others' direction and ever sighing heavily and wishing we could somehow have a magic glimpse into the year 2104 to see how the hell we survive it all? Because there remains this astonishing and yet ever present fact: all the major cities of America, the great cultural centers and the places with the most concentrated populations and the most extraordinary restaurants and the highest percentage of college graduates and the most progressive laws and the truest sense of the arts and food and sex and music and dance and money and technology and lubricant and drugs and porn and love and fashion and spirituality, well, it seems they all voted blue. True. From terrorism-ravaged New York to Botox-ravaged Los Angeles, Chicago to San Francisco, Philly to Portland, Seattle and Miami and Boston and Minneapolis and Detroit -- blue as the sky, blue as the Danube, blue as the color of your soul-crushin' wine-slammin' I-need-a-bath-and-an-emetic postelection melancholy. And what's so frighteningly cute in a slit-your-karmic-wrists sort of way about this whole election thing is how astoundingly vicious and ingrained and apparent the Great American Culture War has become, has evolved, has mutated and grown and smiled and is right now eating us alive and belching out a great cloud of regressive, conformist exhaust. The stats bear it out. One look at this astounding 3-D map used by CBS News the day after the election (a.k.a.: "Black Wednesday") and you can see how the various cities and towns of America voted and you sit there and go oh my freaking God wouldja look at that, it's not blue state versus red state after all, but more like blue urban versus red rural, skyscraper versus church house, Chez Panisse versus Denny's. That is to say, it's all about population density, cultural hub, all about the much-touted "redneck revenge" on the "liberal elite" for unleashing, I suppose, small European cars and artisan cheese and "Queer Eye" and "The West Wing" on them without their express written consent. It is, in short, all about Retro vs. Metro. But wait, it wasn't just the big cities that went blue. It was also the tiny progressive oases, the small but potent gay-friendly intellectually curious America college towns -- almost anyplace, really, that possesses an above-average university -- that are stuck like glimmering gemstones in a sea of conservativism, that stick out like sore thumbs, like beacons, like hot blue tongues from the very mouth of regressive neocon red. Kansas City and St. Louis and Iowa City, and Athens, Georgia, Austin, Texas, Raleigh, North Carolina, Buffalo, New York, and Madison, Wisconsin. All blue. All towns known to be relatively quirky and progressive and safe and kid friendly and beautiful and all-American and replete with big universities and mediocre Thai restaurants and underground music scenes and healthy smatterings of gay culture and lots of gul-dang book-learnin', and every single one of 'em seems to be right in line with the big cities in understanding that Bush is utter poison to anything resembling true juicy spiritual hope or intellectual progress or really exceptional semidrunken sex. Is this really still the rule? The bigger and more vibrant and more vigorous and more culturally dynamic the city, or the more educated and progressive and literate the small town, the more likely they were to vote blue, Democrat, progressive, open minded, less fearful? Have we progressed almost not at all from the days prior to the Civil War, when the nation was split almost exactly as it is now? Verily, it would appear not, not so much. In fact, it's only getting worse. Of course, there are plenty of exceptions, plenty of well-educated culturally astute people across the land who somehow still voted for Bush, often against their own interests or deeper conscience and often for antiquated "fiscally conservative" reasons or because it's just how they're wired or because they think Dubya's a "good Christian" and therefore are willing to overlook his mountain of policy failures, or because they just can't bring themselves, even in the face of astounding proofs of Bush's incompetence, to vote for the party of Hillary and Ted Kennedy and Michael Moore. No, not all city dwellers voted blue. The metropolises are, of course, teeming with conservatives and lib-haters and homophobes, Republican CEOs and phallically challenged Hummer owners and decent Christian folk who don't read the newspaper. And it's also true that liberals and lesbians, tofu eaters and tree huggers, dot the country's rural burgs like sparkles on a heifer, like nails in the tire of the great conservative SUV. The divide is never, despite BushCo's insistence, that clean cut, or that obvious. The cultural war has always raged on one level or another, has always been a part of the blotchy American complexion. But it has never, until now, penetrated the highest positions of the land. It has never, until now, become the defining element of our society. It has never, sadly, dominated our Congress, our houses of law, our White House, our position in the world. But there's more to it than that, more to it than the conservative Right's hatred of same-sex marriage or French restaurants or fancy book learnin'. What to make of the astounding fact, for example, that the very places that are most in danger of attack from terrorism -- that is, places like New York, D.C., Los Angeles -- all went overwhelmingly blue? Put another way, if terrorism was, for the fear-drunk red states, indeed the most galvanizing issue this election, why did those places most susceptible to attack (or, in New York's case, still reeling from one) vote for Kerry in such astounding numbers? What do they know that, say, Kentucky doesn't? Could it be they understand that Bush has, by way of some of the most irresponsible and violent and disastrous foreign policy in American history, actually increased the chances of another terrorist attack in these places? Or that his policies will transform the current anti-Bush sentiment now raging across Europe into full-blown anti-Americanism? Or that there is more to the world than swearwords on prime-time TV or gay men sharing a wedding cake or Janet Jackson's nipple? Yes indeed, the Culture War has now penetrated the highest corridors of power, and the red tide has stormed in, taken control, entrenched itself, demanded regression and rollbacks and a return to old-fashioned American values, the ones that demand you read the Bible and fear foreigners and keep your damn legs closed and your mouth shut and quit asking so many prickly questions that make the president blink all confused-like. Yessir, I guess they showed those goddamn liberals. Guess they showed those damn college boys who's boss. Guess they showed those of us who are most at risk of terror attack and most open to change and most welcoming to the various variations of love and marriage and art and culture in this country who really owns the big stick. How very unfortunate, then, that we are all to be beaten with it. |
Give it up already Bassy.
|
JimH,
You do realize that this was Harry's favorite method of posting in rec.boats, it will take basskisser a few months to realize that Harry is no longer cut and pasting news articles. As soon as he realizes his master has moved on to new things, Basskisser will move on to whatever Harry is doing. "JimH" wrote in message ... Give it up already Bassy. |
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" wrote in message news:ML4ld.329980$wV.329077@attbi_s54... JimH, You do realize that this was Harry's favorite method of posting in rec.boats, it will take basskisser a few months to realize that Harry is no longer cut and pasting news articles. As soon as he realizes his master has moved on to new things, Basskisser will move on to whatever Harry is doing. Asslicker is already aping harry's newest tactic.......delving into personal info on those that don't hold the same narrow minded view. "JimH" wrote in message ... Give it up already Bassy. |
|
Means the smart folks moved out to the suburbs and what's left voted
Democrat. Not hard to figure out. John H Ah yes, Suburbia. Where everybody lives on a dead end street. Suburbanities endure private "covenants" requiring them to conform to the neighbors, so that when it is time to paint the cloned house (with the cloned landscaping) any thought of individual expression is squelched in favor of the "public good." Suburbia, the fantasy consumption neighborhood where the economy produces nothing and the SUV is a god. Suburbia is a land of economic imperialism- all wealth and resources in Suburbia are extracted from some remote area (the city to which all commute). Suburbia, the primarily lilly white land of cultural conformity. It's no wonder you guys in Suburbia vote Republican, the party reflects the values to which you subscribe in everyday life. |
|
|
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... Means the smart folks moved out to the suburbs and what's left voted Democrat. Not hard to figure out. John H Ah yes, Suburbia. Where everybody lives on a dead end street. Suburbanities endure private "covenants" requiring them to conform to the neighbors, so that when it is time to paint the cloned house (with the cloned landscaping) any thought of individual expression is squelched in favor of the "public good." Suburbia, the fantasy consumption neighborhood where the economy produces nothing and the SUV is a god. Suburbia is a land of economic imperialism- all wealth and resources in Suburbia are extracted from some remote area (the city to which all commute). Suburbia, the primarily lilly white land of cultural conformity. I don't know what community you live in, but suburbia is no longer lilly white, you have every ethnic group imaginable in suburbia. People with families are moving to suburbia, because so many of the inner city schools suck. What makes you think minorities do not want a safe environment for their children to learn? If you visited the school districts in suburbia, you would be surprised how diverse they are. |
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... Means the smart folks moved out to the suburbs and what's left voted Democrat. Not hard to figure out. John H Ah yes, Suburbia. Where everybody lives on a dead end street. Suburbanities endure private "covenants" requiring them to conform to the neighbors, so that when it is time to paint the cloned house (with the cloned landscaping) any thought of individual expression is squelched in favor of the "public good." Suburbia, the fantasy consumption neighborhood where the economy produces nothing and the SUV is a god. Suburbia is a land of economic imperialism- all wealth and resources in Suburbia are extracted from some remote area (the city to which all commute). Suburbia, the primarily lilly white land of cultural conformity. It's no wonder you guys in Suburbia vote Republican, the party reflects the values to which you subscribe in everyday life. What world do you live in Chuck? In mine people of all economic classes, all races, all ages and all religions live in suburbia's across the United States. Suburbia is actually more diverse than most inner city neighborhoods. |
|
If you visited the school districts in suburbia, you would be surprised how
diverse they are. Seems that not all that long ago we had an OT post here from a guy who lives in Suburbia. As I recall, he was outraged that "Mexicans" were living in a house in his neighborhood, and he was all but completely convinced they had to be up to no good in order to afford the payments. As I recall, the plaintiff went so far as to check property records with the county to see whether the property was registered to somebody with a Mexican sounding surname. Ain't as integrated as you think, but it is somewhat. See the word "primarily" in my observation. The more expensive, cutting edge suburban neighborhoods will present an ethnic reflection of the way wealth is held in the US. Those "suburban" neighborhoods closer to town, built 25-30 years ago, do seem to be slightly more diverse. |
What world do you live in Chuck? In mine people of all economic classes,
all races, all ages and all religions live in suburbia's across the United States. Suburbia is actually more diverse than most inner city neighborhoods. I recently attended a business function at a new, golf course community in the Cascade foothills- about 20-25 miles from downtown Seattle. This place is brand new. They are going to hold a PGA tournament there in 2005 or 2006. The houses are all painted various shades of beige, all have the same roofing, the same windows, etc. Two or three new sections are still under construction, and all the $1mm plus houses are painted various shades of beige. While I didn't go door to door and do a survey, I did see some diversity while I was there... a number of minorities worked for the catering company- (but I'll bet you a buck they weren't living in the immediate community). |
"Gould 0738" wrote in message ... What world do you live in Chuck? In mine people of all economic classes, all races, all ages and all religions live in suburbia's across the United States. Suburbia is actually more diverse than most inner city neighborhoods. I recently attended a business function at a new, golf course community in the Cascade foothills- about 20-25 miles from downtown Seattle. This place is brand new. They are going to hold a PGA tournament there in 2005 or 2006. The houses are all painted various shades of beige, all have the same roofing, the same windows, etc. Two or three new sections are still under construction, and all the $1mm plus houses are painted various shades of beige. While I didn't go door to door and do a survey, I did see some diversity while I was there... a number of minorities worked for the catering company- (but I'll bet you a buck they weren't living in the immediate community). And that snap shot picture certainly is a true representation of all of suburbia. My, what a broad brush we paint with Chuck. |
|
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:16:07 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
Anyway, to head off a huge name calling response, I do not believe that gay marriage is the end of the world as we know it. I would prefer that the term be reserved for those who can propagate the species, but that's not completely necessary. I do believe that those who are part of the gay/lesbian community are entitled to some sort of civil recognition as in civil unions, but I'm not wedded to it. What I find interesting, the term "gay marriage" makes a difference. Use the term "civil union" or "domestic partnership" and the issue isn't nearly as divisive. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...il-union_x.htm |
Describe your neighborhoods for us, Chuck. Do you live in downtown
Seattle, where all the factories are producing something? Or were you just being negative? I was being half assed facetious, but it seems I struck a nerve mine. :-) I do live in a neighborhood at the perimeter of downtown Seattle. We have a large number of neighborhood shops, restaurants, art galleries, a public library, markets, and other amenities within a ten-minute leisurely walk (yes, "walk") from our front door. There's a park across the street. I can walk to the Seattle Center in about twenty-five minutes, or to the heart of downtown Seattle in about forty. There is not a lot of diversity in my neighborhood, either. We've lived here for many years, but couldn't afford (or wouldn't choose to afford) to buy into this neighborhood today. There's a limit to what one should tie up in a non-productive asset such as a house, (or a boat). Like some of the locations in Suburbia, many urban neighborhoods also present an ethnic reflection of the way that wealth is distributed in our society. Difference is, we're smart enough to know that all the "smart people" don't live in Suburbia, or in "Urbia", either. :-) |
Had nothing to do with their country of origin, had to do with their
habits, and the number of people and cars for one house and yard. Get off your high horse, Chuck, it's not becoming. Was that you? I remembered the incident, but not the party involved. My horse has a question: If it wasn't about ethnicity, why were the people described with an ethnic label? When my neighbor does something I wish he hadn't done, I don't say "My Anglo Saxon Catholic nieghbor did this or that..........." |
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 13:37:22 -0500, thunder
wrote: On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:16:07 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Anyway, to head off a huge name calling response, I do not believe that gay marriage is the end of the world as we know it. I would prefer that the term be reserved for those who can propagate the species, but that's not completely necessary. I do believe that those who are part of the gay/lesbian community are entitled to some sort of civil recognition as in civil unions, but I'm not wedded to it. What I find interesting, the term "gay marriage" makes a difference. Use the term "civil union" or "domestic partnership" and the issue isn't nearly as divisive. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...il-union_x.htm I totally agree with that and it was pretty much the point of the article. Hell, I'm like everyone else - I have pejudices that influence my immediate reactions to concepts and ideas, but let's try and solve this one without trying to rip each groups throats out. Get it written into law and let it go. In MA, Tom "I never met a contribution I didn't keep" Finneran almost got it done, but couldn't keep the consensus because the Supreme Judicial Court ordered gay marriage into law. What folks reacted to in MA was the absolute arrogance on the part of Margaret Marshall who was going to have gay marriage and she didn't give a damn about what the citizens thought or said. If the bozo politicians worked at it, I'd bet we can get it done quickly with no muss or fuss. Just have to keep the judicial fiats out of the mix. And don't give me any crap about masses of red Christian coalitions - they don't exist. It's little advocate groups that make the most noise, not the great unwashed proletariat. Later, Tom |
"basskisser" wrote in message Down With Fancy Book Learnin' What's it mean that the big cities and college towns of America all voted blue? By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist Friday, November 12, 2004 Perhaps we're getting some indication of why b'ass is the way he is. Lot's of folk, myself included, read Morford with some regularity. B'ass seems to take him seriously. |
I can not understand your point. Do you have a problem with people buying
expensive homes or the fact that not everyone can afford expensive homes? In the under $200,000 home, which is above the national average (I know the west coast is expensive as hell), you will find a large percent to be owned by non whites. Do you have a problem with people buying homes based upon their financial situation or based upon the reputation of the schools? Do you have a problem with people who move into the suburbs? As far as your other comment, most communities, apartments, condos and cities in both the inner city and suburbs will have zoning laws governing how property can be used. I know if I had a neighbor who did not mow his law, had turned his front law into a parking lot, had trash all over his property, I would be upset, and it would not matter what their ethnic background was. I would contact the local government as see if they were violating any laws, wouldn't you? "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... If you visited the school districts in suburbia, you would be surprised how diverse they are. Seems that not all that long ago we had an OT post here from a guy who lives in Suburbia. As I recall, he was outraged that "Mexicans" were living in a house in his neighborhood, and he was all but completely convinced they had to be up to no good in order to afford the payments. As I recall, the plaintiff went so far as to check property records with the county to see whether the property was registered to somebody with a Mexican sounding surname. Ain't as integrated as you think, but it is somewhat. See the word "primarily" in my observation. The more expensive, cutting edge suburban neighborhoods will present an ethnic reflection of the way wealth is held in the US. Those "suburban" neighborhoods closer to town, built 25-30 years ago, do seem to be slightly more diverse. |
Gould,
One other point about urban areas vs. suburban areas. In most cities the inner city is becoming gentrified. Young professionals are buying homes in the city, getting strict zoning and covenants passed so they will have their investments protected. They are then bidding up the value of the homes so they can do extensive remolding. Some of those who live in the inner city feel it is unfair to them, because when the young professionals move in, they have less affordable homes. Should we view these young professionals as a blight on the inner city? "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... If you visited the school districts in suburbia, you would be surprised how diverse they are. Seems that not all that long ago we had an OT post here from a guy who lives in Suburbia. As I recall, he was outraged that "Mexicans" were living in a house in his neighborhood, and he was all but completely convinced they had to be up to no good in order to afford the payments. As I recall, the plaintiff went so far as to check property records with the county to see whether the property was registered to somebody with a Mexican sounding surname. Ain't as integrated as you think, but it is somewhat. See the word "primarily" in my observation. The more expensive, cutting edge suburban neighborhoods will present an ethnic reflection of the way wealth is held in the US. Those "suburban" neighborhoods closer to town, built 25-30 years ago, do seem to be slightly more diverse. |
I can not remember your comment, but I know Gould would be very upset if his
boating neighbor left their tools all over the dock or left beer cans scattered all over the dock and in the water. Most marinas have very strict rules and enforce them, and most marinas do not care what your color is, as long as you have the green. "JohnH" wrote in message ... On 12 Nov 2004 18:18:54 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote: If you visited the school districts in suburbia, you would be surprised how diverse they are. Seems that not all that long ago we had an OT post here from a guy who lives in Suburbia. As I recall, he was outraged that "Mexicans" were living in a house in his neighborhood, and he was all but completely convinced they had to be up to no good in order to afford the payments. As I recall, the plaintiff went so far as to check property records with the county to see whether the property was registered to somebody with a Mexican sounding surname. Ain't as integrated as you think, but it is somewhat. See the word "primarily" in my observation. The more expensive, cutting edge suburban neighborhoods will present an ethnic reflection of the way wealth is held in the US. Those "suburban" neighborhoods closer to town, built 25-30 years ago, do seem to be slightly more diverse. Had nothing to do with their country of origin, had to do with their habits, and the number of people and cars for one house and yard. Get off your high horse, Chuck, it's not becoming. John H On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD, on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |
What in the hell is your point? That neighborhood is not reflective of the
average neighborhood in America. But in most communities you will find very rich blacks, Hispanics and Asians. Where do you think the rappers, sports stars, minority businessmen live? I also bet the average unskilled worker does not live in your neighborhood or own a boat. It would appear that you concern is not towards those who have less than you, but those who have more than you. "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... What world do you live in Chuck? In mine people of all economic classes, all races, all ages and all religions live in suburbia's across the United States. Suburbia is actually more diverse than most inner city neighborhoods. I recently attended a business function at a new, golf course community in the Cascade foothills- about 20-25 miles from downtown Seattle. This place is brand new. They are going to hold a PGA tournament there in 2005 or 2006. The houses are all painted various shades of beige, all have the same roofing, the same windows, etc. Two or three new sections are still under construction, and all the $1mm plus houses are painted various shades of beige. While I didn't go door to door and do a survey, I did see some diversity while I was there... a number of minorities worked for the catering company- (but I'll bet you a buck they weren't living in the immediate community). |
|
|
|
"JohnH" wrote in message ... On 12 Nov 2004 18:41:43 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote: Describe your neighborhoods for us, Chuck. Do you live in downtown Seattle, where all the factories are producing something? Or were you just being negative? I was being half assed facetious, but it seems I struck a nerve mine. :-) I do live in a neighborhood at the perimeter of downtown Seattle. We have a large number of neighborhood shops, restaurants, art galleries, a public library, markets, and other amenities within a ten-minute leisurely walk (yes, "walk") from our front door. There's a park across the street. I can walk to the Seattle Center in about twenty-five minutes, or to the heart of downtown Seattle in about forty. There is not a lot of diversity in my neighborhood, either. We've lived here for many years, but couldn't afford (or wouldn't choose to afford) to buy into this neighborhood today. There's a limit to what one should tie up in a non-productive asset such as a house, (or a boat). Like some of the locations in Suburbia, many urban neighborhoods also present an ethnic reflection of the way that wealth is distributed in our society. Difference is, we're smart enough to know that all the "smart people" don't live in Suburbia, or in "Urbia", either. :-) Sounds like you live up on the hill. I had no idea you were being facetious. That's because it is getting very hard to tell the difference with many of your posts. I guess I'm just getting senile and unintelligent. John H On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD, on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! When he is cornered in a discussion his out is typically that he was being "half assed facetious" or something similar to that. *Half assed facetious* my ass. |
I can not understand your point.
Because you choose not to consider it with an open mind. Do you have a problem with people buying expensive homes or the fact that not everyone can afford expensive homes? Of course not. I have a problem with people living in expensive homes adopting a position that they are "smarter" (as in all the smart people moved to the suburbs). In the under $200,000 home, which is above the national average (I know the west coast is expensive as hell), you will find a large percent to be owned by non whites. I don't think there have been any liveable homes under $200,000 in this area for several years now. Fixer uppers are $500k. New homes in the suburbs are usually in the 7-figure range if you want something over 2000 sq ft in a posh neighborhood. Double that for most "gated communities". In any area of the country, home ownership will reflect the same ethnic proportions in which wealth itself is held. Those with more wealth tend to live in nicer homes. Nobody should be awarded a better home than they can afford, or conversely forced to live below their means by virtue of race. A large number of non-whites own homes in most communities across the country. We're two generations away from one non-white group of super achievers owning almost everything on the west coast. And more power to anybody willing to work hard enough to achieve such a goal. Do you have a problem with people buying homes based upon their financial situation or based upon the reputation of the schools? Nope. Merely observed that the contrived, conformist existence in Suburbia is reflected in the voting tendencies claimed by one of the conservatives here 'bouts. I do have a problem when the "reputation of the schools" is created by transferring tax dollars out of inner city neighborhoods and away from inner city schools to create state-of-the-art education centers for kids attending more suburban schools in the same county or district. Do you have a problem with people who move into the suburbs? I lived in the suburbs for a few years. Not my thing, thanks anyway. Anybody who wants to enjoy the traffic jams, the strip malls, the automobile dependent transportation system, the conformist neighborhoods, the Plastmo-Sign franchise substitute for culture, etc.....is more than welcome to my space there. No, I have no problem with those who find the meaning of life in suburbia. As far as your other comment, most communities, apartments, condos and cities in both the inner city and suburbs will have zoning laws governing how property can be used. Agreed. Most suburban communities have extra-legal covenants that give your neighbors veto power over the type of vehicle you can ( otherwise legally) park in your own driveway, the color you can paint your house, the type of landscaping you can plant on your property, the size and shape of your mailbox, etc. Much different from "Thou shalt not operate a whore house across the street from a grade school." One is a matter of public safety and propriety, the other is an extension of the herd mentality by a committee of neighborhood busy bodies. |
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 13:37:22 -0500, thunder
wrote: On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:16:07 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Anyway, to head off a huge name calling response, I do not believe that gay marriage is the end of the world as we know it. I would prefer that the term be reserved for those who can propagate the species, but that's not completely necessary. I do believe that those who are part of the gay/lesbian community are entitled to some sort of civil recognition as in civil unions, but I'm not wedded to it. What I find interesting, the term "gay marriage" makes a difference. Use the term "civil union" or "domestic partnership" and the issue isn't nearly as divisive. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...il-union_x.htm I thought the whole damn thing revolved around the word 'marriage'. With all this fighting about what to call the 'union' of gays or lesbians, imagine the fighting that will happen over what we call the 'disunion' of gays and lesbians. They sure as hell better not call it 'divorce' ! That word should be reserved only for a man and a woman. John H On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD, on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 19:01:48 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
If the bozo politicians worked at it, I'd bet we can get it done quickly with no muss or fuss. Just have to keep the judicial fiats out of the mix. This state, New Jersey, along with several others, has done it. It was a blip on the local news when it was done, but since that time I haven't heard anything about it. It wasn't called "marriage", and to be honest, I'm not sure what "legalities" go with it. |
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 14:44:29 -0500, JohnH
wrote: On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 13:37:22 -0500, thunder wrote: On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:16:07 +0000, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Anyway, to head off a huge name calling response, I do not believe that gay marriage is the end of the world as we know it. I would prefer that the term be reserved for those who can propagate the species, but that's not completely necessary. I do believe that those who are part of the gay/lesbian community are entitled to some sort of civil recognition as in civil unions, but I'm not wedded to it. What I find interesting, the term "gay marriage" makes a difference. Use the term "civil union" or "domestic partnership" and the issue isn't nearly as divisive. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/...il-union_x.htm I thought the whole damn thing revolved around the word 'marriage'. With all this fighting about what to call the 'union' of gays or lesbians, imagine the fighting that will happen over what we call the 'disunion' of gays and lesbians. They sure as hell better not call it 'divorce' ! That word should be reserved only for a man and a woman. Not another discussion around the discussion discussing the original discussion that went off-topic eight discussions ago!!!!!!! NNNNNNOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.................. .......... All the best, Tom -------------- "What the hell's the deal with this newsgroup... is there a computer terminal in the day room of some looney bin somewhere?" Bilgeman - circa 2004 |
No generalization is always correct, but I would think if you gave an IQ
test to those living below the poverty level, and then gave a IQ test to those living in the top 10% of the US, you would find the average IQ is substantially higher. I would also guess if you took those whose income is in the top 25% and compared their IQ with those living in the bottom 25%, you would see a dramatic difference. I do like the way when someone disagrees with you, you generalize that they do not have an open mind. As far as your comment about tax dollars being diverted from inner city schools to those who live in the rich neighborhoods, that has not been around for 20yrs. The courts will not allow any school district to divert money from one neighborhood to another. That fact that you think this is still done, shows that you do live in the past. As far as your comment about "herd mentality" it would appear that you do not have an open mind, and just love to paint anyone who is different from you with a broad brush and you fail to see the obvious. Most cities with historic districts have more restrictive covenants (especially those in the strongly democratic states of New England) than any suburb covenants. That fact that you do not understand such a simple concept says more about your herd mentality than anything I could say. PS - I have moved from the suburbs to the city, the difference between you and me, is I don't like to group anyone with my preconceived ideas. I like to look at people as individuals. "Gould 0738" wrote in message ... I can not understand your point. Because you choose not to consider it with an open mind. Do you have a problem with people buying expensive homes or the fact that not everyone can afford expensive homes? Of course not. I have a problem with people living in expensive homes adopting a position that they are "smarter" (as in all the smart people moved to the suburbs). In the under $200,000 home, which is above the national average (I know the west coast is expensive as hell), you will find a large percent to be owned by non whites. I don't think there have been any liveable homes under $200,000 in this area for several years now. Fixer uppers are $500k. New homes in the suburbs are usually in the 7-figure range if you want something over 2000 sq ft in a posh neighborhood. Double that for most "gated communities". In any area of the country, home ownership will reflect the same ethnic proportions in which wealth itself is held. Those with more wealth tend to live in nicer homes. Nobody should be awarded a better home than they can afford, or conversely forced to live below their means by virtue of race. A large number of non-whites own homes in most communities across the country. We're two generations away from one non-white group of super achievers owning almost everything on the west coast. And more power to anybody willing to work hard enough to achieve such a goal. Do you have a problem with people buying homes based upon their financial situation or based upon the reputation of the schools? Nope. Merely observed that the contrived, conformist existence in Suburbia is reflected in the voting tendencies claimed by one of the conservatives here 'bouts. I do have a problem when the "reputation of the schools" is created by transferring tax dollars out of inner city neighborhoods and away from inner city schools to create state-of-the-art education centers for kids attending more suburban schools in the same county or district. Do you have a problem with people who move into the suburbs? I lived in the suburbs for a few years. Not my thing, thanks anyway. Anybody who wants to enjoy the traffic jams, the strip malls, the automobile dependent transportation system, the conformist neighborhoods, the Plastmo-Sign franchise substitute for culture, etc.....is more than welcome to my space there. No, I have no problem with those who find the meaning of life in suburbia. As far as your other comment, most communities, apartments, condos and cities in both the inner city and suburbs will have zoning laws governing how property can be used. Agreed. Most suburban communities have extra-legal covenants that give your neighbors veto power over the type of vehicle you can ( otherwise legally) park in your own driveway, the color you can paint your house, the type of landscaping you can plant on your property, the size and shape of your mailbox, etc. Much different from "Thou shalt not operate a whore house across the street from a grade school." One is a matter of public safety and propriety, the other is an extension of the herd mentality by a committee of neighborhood busy bodies. |
"P.Fritz" wrote in message ...
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" wrote in message news:ML4ld.329980$wV.329077@attbi_s54... JimH, You do realize that this was Harry's favorite method of posting in rec.boats, it will take basskisser a few months to realize that Harry is no longer cut and pasting news articles. As soon as he realizes his master has moved on to new things, Basskisser will move on to whatever Harry is doing. Asslicker is already aping harry's newest tactic.......delving into personal info on those that don't hold the same narrow minded view. Jeezus! Do you even HAVE enough brain power to post or reply without childish name calling? Do you? Now, let's do this, Fritz. Google up YOUR posts, and see just how many cut and paste jobs YOU have done. Many, many. |
"Dr. Dr. Smithers" wrote in message news:ML4ld.329980$wV.329077@attbi_s54...
JimH, You do realize that this was Harry's favorite method of posting in rec.boats, it will take basskisser a few months to realize that Harry is no longer cut and pasting news articles. As soon as he realizes his master has moved on to new things, Basskisser will move on to whatever Harry is doing. As well as Fritz's, but you seem to condone it from him just fine, huh? |
"basskisser" wrote in message m... "Dr. Dr. Smithers" wrote in message news:ML4ld.329980$wV.329077@attbi_s54... JimH, You do realize that this was Harry's favorite method of posting in rec.boats, it will take basskisser a few months to realize that Harry is no longer cut and pasting news articles. As soon as he realizes his master has moved on to new things, Basskisser will move on to whatever Harry is doing. As well as Fritz's, but you seem to condone it from him just fine, huh? Can you show me one post where I condoned anything Fritz has done? |
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 20:17:24 GMT, "Dr. Dr. Smithers"
wrote: No generalization is always correct, but I would think if you gave an IQ test to those living below the poverty level, and then gave a IQ test to those living in the top 10% of the US, you would find the average IQ is substantially higher. I would also guess if you took those whose income is in the top 25% and compared their IQ with those living in the bottom 25%, you would see a dramatic difference. I do like the way when someone disagrees with you, you generalize that they do not have an open mind. As far as your comment about tax dollars being diverted from inner city schools to those who live in the rich neighborhoods, that has not been around for 20yrs. The courts will not allow any school district to divert money from one neighborhood to another. That fact that you think this is still done, shows that you do live in the past. As far as your comment about "herd mentality" it would appear that you do not have an open mind, and just love to paint anyone who is different from you with a broad brush and you fail to see the obvious. Most cities with historic districts have more restrictive covenants (especially those in the strongly democratic states of New England) than any suburb covenants. That fact that you do not understand such a simple concept says more about your herd mentality than anything I could say. PS - I have moved from the suburbs to the city, the difference between you and me, is I don't like to group anyone with my preconceived ideas. I like to look at people as individuals. Hey, come on, he was just kidding! John H On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD, on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |
"JohnH" wrote in message ... On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 20:17:24 GMT, "Dr. Dr. Smithers" wrote: No generalization is always correct, but I would think if you gave an IQ test to those living below the poverty level, and then gave a IQ test to those living in the top 10% of the US, you would find the average IQ is substantially higher. I would also guess if you took those whose income is in the top 25% and compared their IQ with those living in the bottom 25%, you would see a dramatic difference. I do like the way when someone disagrees with you, you generalize that they do not have an open mind. As far as your comment about tax dollars being diverted from inner city schools to those who live in the rich neighborhoods, that has not been around for 20yrs. The courts will not allow any school district to divert money from one neighborhood to another. That fact that you think this is still done, shows that you do live in the past. As far as your comment about "herd mentality" it would appear that you do not have an open mind, and just love to paint anyone who is different from you with a broad brush and you fail to see the obvious. Most cities with historic districts have more restrictive covenants (especially those in the strongly democratic states of New England) than any suburb covenants. That fact that you do not understand such a simple concept says more about your herd mentality than anything I could say. PS - I have moved from the suburbs to the city, the difference between you and me, is I don't like to group anyone with my preconceived ideas. I like to look at people as individuals. Hey, come on, he was just kidding! John H On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD, on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! He-he-he. |
If Gould was kidding than all I have to say is ............. " Nevermind!"
Gould does seem to have gotten on a high horse and has a real superiority complex. He is one of the most bigoted and close minded person I have meet in rec.boats. If anyone does not see things his way, he likes to paint them as evil. "JohnH" wrote in message ... On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 20:17:24 GMT, "Dr. Dr. Smithers" wrote: No generalization is always correct, but I would think if you gave an IQ test to those living below the poverty level, and then gave a IQ test to those living in the top 10% of the US, you would find the average IQ is substantially higher. I would also guess if you took those whose income is in the top 25% and compared their IQ with those living in the bottom 25%, you would see a dramatic difference. I do like the way when someone disagrees with you, you generalize that they do not have an open mind. As far as your comment about tax dollars being diverted from inner city schools to those who live in the rich neighborhoods, that has not been around for 20yrs. The courts will not allow any school district to divert money from one neighborhood to another. That fact that you think this is still done, shows that you do live in the past. As far as your comment about "herd mentality" it would appear that you do not have an open mind, and just love to paint anyone who is different from you with a broad brush and you fail to see the obvious. Most cities with historic districts have more restrictive covenants (especially those in the strongly democratic states of New England) than any suburb covenants. That fact that you do not understand such a simple concept says more about your herd mentality than anything I could say. PS - I have moved from the suburbs to the city, the difference between you and me, is I don't like to group anyone with my preconceived ideas. I like to look at people as individuals. Hey, come on, he was just kidding! John H On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD, on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:01 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com