On Sat, 13 May 2006 20:17:33 -0400, John Gaquin wrote:


The simple, sad, inescapable fact is that except
for very small towns, democracy doesn't work well or efficiently. Gives a
lot of people lots of feel-good warm-fuzzies, but is utterly wasteful and
innefficient as a management system if you want to get anything done.

I dunno, but it sounds good to me. Quite often I think government should
get a little less done. ;-)

On Sat, 13 May 2006 18:19:12 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

You're probably right. I wonder what it would take to make the idiot
feel as if he should resign.

Gasoline at $1 a gallon.

bb

wrote:
A while ago I posted this:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...4010490?&hl=en
Check the P.S.

And now this:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/...oll/index.html

Mark Browne

I know the "b" and the "V" are right next to each other on your
keyboard, but if you can spell at all you shouldn't be confused between
rec.Boats (where your OT crap appeared) and rec.Votes (where you must
have intended to stir up trouble).

Where do you normally go for political arguments? Do you suppose it
would make a lot of sense if folks from this group appeared there to
discuss deadrise, navigation, or marine electronics?

Harry Krause wrote:


Several of us are having a perfectly nice discussion here, and we're not
on the same side, politically. If you don't like it, just skip over
these posts.

Too bad that experience indicates that as soon as one side or the other
scores a "zinger" the name calling, etc, will begin and that it won't
be limited to this particular thread. When the schidt flinging and
personal remarks spill over from this totally inappropriate thread into
the on-topic items that people seek out a NG to read, it is then no
longer possible to just "skip over" the posts and have a functional
group.

The OP had no business launching an anti-Bush thread here. You probably
have some idea about whether or not I actually agree with most
anti-Bush sentiments people might care to express, but IMO we need to
exercise some self control to keep the group on course rather than sit
along the sidelines salivating until somebody else "starts it" and we
can get our pro-Bush or anti-Bush licks in for the day. :-)

I did not mean to launch a personal atrtack on you, sorry you took it
that way.
You said that people responding to the survey were dysfunctional, I
was just pointing out that perhaps your thinking on the issues is not
quite as functional as you might like to think, (which I admit is sort
of an insult,) but meant more in a debating rather than derogatory
sense since it was you who used the term "dysfunctional Americans" in
the first place.
Peace,
John C.


On Sat, 13 May 2006 20:24:31 -0400, "John Gaquin"
wrote:


"John Chaplain" wrote in message

No, the polls shows that many of the many dysfunctional Americans who
voted this poor excuse for a human in are starting to wake up and
realize what a bufoon they put in office. Sorry if you can't face the
reality that America is finally waking up and seeing Bush for the
jackoff he is. You'll just deny it and blame the polls for being all
wrong. Very functional thinking on your part....lol...

Most of us stopped using personal insult as a standard debating tool
somewhere around the age of 12.

My post made no comment one way or the other regarding the efficacy of the
GWB or Clinton administrations. The sole point was that it is pontless or
misleading to ask simplistic poll questions when the two administrations
operated in such markedly different economic and foreign policy contexts.
Hence, grapefruit or fried clams?

Puleeze Chuck. Use your filter to remove OT: posts. I'm pretty sure you
know how.

Chuck,

You are of course correct; this is a bit of a troll.

I came to the group when I started working on my Crestliner and got
very bummed out by all the political crap spewed on a regular basis. I
rose to the bait on several threads and became one of the regular
polluters of the group.

It is one thing to cut and paste the political drivel; I worked though
what had to happen and it really did help ME understand what I was
thinking about the issues. Sending your kids off to war can do things
like that to you.

During that time I made a dozen or so verifiable predictions about how
this war adventuring and financial recklessness would all turn out.

When I realized that I was not learning anything new about the issues I
stopped. Since then, I have tried to exercise restraint and only
respond to posts where I actually know something about the topic and
that it truly boating related.

This poll thing happened to be one of the predictions and I succumbed
to the "I told you so" thing. On the plus side, there are only about 10
or so OT issues predictions left to verify; and I will try to be strong
but it's hard when you are proved right like that.

Sorry.


Mark Browne

jiminfl wrote:
Puleeze Chuck. Use your filter to remove OT: posts. I'm pretty sure you
know how.

That's not the point.

The political crap flinging inspires flaming and name calling that
overflows the borders of the
trolled threads and finds its way into the on-topic material. There are
years of history to verify this. Most participants in rec.boats don't
have the capacity to call one another vile names in one thread and then
have a civil discussion in another.

"John Chaplain" wrote in message

I did not mean to launch a personal atrtack on you, sorry you took it
that way.
OK, no harm done.

You said that people responding to the survey were dysfunctional.....

......since it was you who used the term "dysfunctional Americans" in
the first place.

Well, not quite accurate. The term I used was "...no functional thought
process...". The point is that when asked that type of simplistic polling
question, --"who did a better job, Clinton or Bush?"--, the first response
of any thinking person ought to be "Trick question!!" They operated in two
different worlds.

John Gaquin wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message

..... it's called active or participatory democracy, as opposed to our
passive model. For an example, look south towards Venezuela. Remember
the recall election Chavez survived? That is an example of an active
democracy.

Any government subject to recall on the basis of popularity polls is not
stable by anyone's definition.

Yeah, what to hell do you guys want? A government in which the people
actually have a say in how it's ran?