![]() |
AT&T offer's VOIP
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 09:47:10 -0500, BAR wrote:
Do any of you remember the nation wide telephone problem that occured on e day in '89? I don't know the specifics of the problem but a bug in SS7 caused all of the major switches across the country on AT&T's network started shutting down and would not restart. Took a software change to fix the problem. I believe that the outage lasted about 10 or 12 hours. I mentioned it earlier in the thread. The site outage took 12 hours - the results in resetting the system took 28 hours in total to get everything back on line. Another cascade failure. $5 relay part and havoc ruled the day. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 11:41:05 -0600, Vic Smith
wrote: On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 14:33:43 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: Well, we will probably continue to agree to disagree. :) I don't think we really disagree, more like we view the consequences of some breakdowns differently. I think we can agree the shuttle disasters occurred because "simple" systems failed. Frankly, for all the admiration I have for the teams that put the shuttles together, the management side let them and astronauts down. You may feel differently, but I view both failures as preventable and unnecessary. The o-ring problem was known, and so was the ice hitting tiles. They took chances they didn't have to take. Given the tremendous achievements of the shuttle program it's difficult to come down on them hard, but that's my opinion. It's true, but you have to consider humans as a part of the system - it's not only just the part, but the decisions that lead up to how that part was utilized. In both shuttle cases, humans made the decision based on the best evidence available at the time. But since I'm here, and you know more this than me, how the hell did the Great Depression occur, and could it happen again? Of course it could. Five conditions are commonly considered necessary for a market crash - prolonged period of rising stock prices, irrational exuberance, P/E ratios exceed long-term averages, and extensive use of margin debt and leverage by market participants. There are other psychological and monetary conditions, but those are the biggies. In 1929 you have all five conditions plus economic features like communications technology (radio/telephone), increasing use of automobiles, begining of civil aviation, telephone and the power grid development. Monetary power was held by several corporations and two or three brokerage houses. Minor houses became involved in heavy margin activity. Deep recessions always occur with leading edge indicators. In the summer of 1929, it was a contracting economy (took much production, too much money), decreasing confidence in the financial system and loss of confidence due to a series of financial scandals. Sound familiar? :) My real "economic" concern is that we don't produce our own goods, and China has us by the balls. So does any number of countries and for a variety of reasons. Look into it sometime and see what havoc the sub-prime market is having on smaller Eurpoean countries. It's scary. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... Look into it sometime and see what havoc the sub-prime market is having on smaller Eurpoean countries. It's scary. You just made an extremely good point, Tom. The current housing/credit crisis is not a USA specific issue or problem. It's world-wide. The media and spin artists give the impression that it's unique to the continued downfall of the USA. Eisboch |
AT&T offer's VOIP
On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 15:41:26 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message .. . Look into it sometime and see what havoc the sub-prime market is having on smaller Eurpoean countries. It's scary. You just made an extremely good point, Tom. The current housing/credit crisis is not a USA specific issue or problem. It's world-wide. I just read an article about a small town in Norway that is into CDOs structured on sub-prime debt and they don't have enough money to fund their social retirement system and local government. The Dutch, who have a 63% income tax, are also having some dislocations due to CDOs. The viability of their social system is comeing under severe pressure. The media and spin artists give the impression that it's unique to the continued downfall of the USA. I agree. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 22:04:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote: On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 15:41:26 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message . .. Look into it sometime and see what havoc the sub-prime market is having on smaller Eurpoean countries. It's scary. You just made an extremely good point, Tom. The current housing/credit crisis is not a USA specific issue or problem. It's world-wide. I just read an article about a small town in Norway that is into CDOs structured on sub-prime debt and they don't have enough money to fund their social retirement system and local government. The Dutch, who have a 63% income tax, are also having some dislocations due to CDOs. The viability of their social system is comeing under severe pressure. The media and spin artists give the impression that it's unique to the continued downfall of the USA. I agree. The Dutch are beginning to see the light regarding their social welfare system. The problem is that many of the voters are the ones receiving the welfare. Guess who they continue to vote for. They invited their immigration problem, and it's burying them. Nothing like that could ever happen in this country, of course. -- John H |
AT&T offer's VOIP
John H. wrote:
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 22:04:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 15:41:26 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... Look into it sometime and see what havoc the sub-prime market is having on smaller Eurpoean countries. It's scary. You just made an extremely good point, Tom. The current housing/credit crisis is not a USA specific issue or problem. It's world-wide. I just read an article about a small town in Norway that is into CDOs structured on sub-prime debt and they don't have enough money to fund their social retirement system and local government. The Dutch, who have a 63% income tax, are also having some dislocations due to CDOs. The viability of their social system is comeing under severe pressure. The media and spin artists give the impression that it's unique to the continued downfall of the USA. I agree. The Dutch are beginning to see the light regarding their social welfare system. The problem is that many of the voters are the ones receiving the welfare. Guess who they continue to vote for. They invited their immigration problem, and it's burying them. Nothing like that could ever happen in this country, of course. This country has been sliding into hell since 1980, and will continue its journey until it gets there. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
HK wrote:
John H. wrote: On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 22:04:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 15:41:26 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... Look into it sometime and see what havoc the sub-prime market is having on smaller Eurpoean countries. It's scary. You just made an extremely good point, Tom. The current housing/credit crisis is not a USA specific issue or problem. It's world-wide. I just read an article about a small town in Norway that is into CDOs structured on sub-prime debt and they don't have enough money to fund their social retirement system and local government. The Dutch, who have a 63% income tax, are also having some dislocations due to CDOs. The viability of their social system is comeing under severe pressure. The media and spin artists give the impression that it's unique to the continued downfall of the USA. I agree. The Dutch are beginning to see the light regarding their social welfare system. The problem is that many of the voters are the ones receiving the welfare. Guess who they continue to vote for. They invited their immigration problem, and it's burying them. Nothing like that could ever happen in this country, of course. This country has been sliding into hell since 1980, and will continue its journey until it gets there. Thanks for sharing. All I have to say is it's not over till it's over. How about this one. When you get to the fork in the road, ... take it. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
HK wrote:
This country has been sliding into hell since 1980, and will continue its journey until it gets there. "The sky is falling! The sky is falling!" -- Charlie |
AT&T offer's VOIP
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:29:07 -0500, HK wrote:
This country has been sliding into hell since 1980, and will continue its journey until it gets there. Help me out. What happened in 1980? |
AT&T offer's VOIP
Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:29:07 -0500, HK wrote: This country has been sliding into hell since 1980, and will continue its journey until it gets there. Help me out. What happened in 1980? Your 49' RV sank at the dock, but was hoisted out and fixed up. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:18:17 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote: On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:29:07 -0500, HK wrote: This country has been sliding into hell since 1980, and will continue its journey until it gets there. Help me out. What happened in 1980? Jimmy Carter bailed out Chrysler for 1.5 billion. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:22:25 -0500, HK wrote:
Your 49' RV sank at the dock, but was hoisted out and fixed up. Nope, not even built yet. I hope you're not referring to the election of Ronald Reagan. We could use someone with his common sense approach to leadership and management right now. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
"Wayne.B" wrote in message ... On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:29:07 -0500, HK wrote: This country has been sliding into hell since 1980, and will continue its journey until it gets there. Help me out. What happened in 1980? My favorite President was elected. Eisboch |
AT&T offer's VOIP
Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:22:25 -0500, HK wrote: Your 49' RV sank at the dock, but was hoisted out and fixed up. Nope, not even built yet. I hope you're not referring to the election of Ronald Reagan. We could use someone with his common sense approach to leadership and management right now. Please. Our ATC system has never recovered, and is rapidly heading straight down the tubes. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
Wayne.B wrote:
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:29:07 -0500, HK wrote: This country has been sliding into hell since 1980, and will continue its journey until it gets there. Help me out. What happened in 1980? The malaise ended. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
HK wrote:
Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:22:25 -0500, HK wrote: Your 49' RV sank at the dock, but was hoisted out and fixed up. Nope, not even built yet. I hope you're not referring to the election of Ronald Reagan. We could use someone with his common sense approach to leadership and management right now. Please. Our ATC system has never recovered, and is rapidly heading straight down the tubes. They played the strike card and RWR played the you are fired card. The system recovered. It is the incompetent government contracting method that has caused the problems. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
"BAR" wrote in message ... HK wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:22:25 -0500, HK wrote: Your 49' RV sank at the dock, but was hoisted out and fixed up. Nope, not even built yet. I hope you're not referring to the election of Ronald Reagan. We could use someone with his common sense approach to leadership and management right now. Please. Our ATC system has never recovered, and is rapidly heading straight down the tubes. They played the strike card and RWR played the you are fired card. The system recovered. It is the incompetent government contracting method that has caused the problems. It's the result of over crowded flight paths, antiquated equipment and increased demand for flights. The people in the ATC system do an amazing job under the circumstances. It has nothing to do with Ronny Wrinkles busting an illegal strike 20 years ago. Eisboch |
AT&T offer's VOIP
On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 22:07:38 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
Help me out. What happened in 1980? My favorite President was elected. I eventually came around to that point of view also. He had a way of keeping things in perspective. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
"Wayne.B" wrote in message ... On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 22:07:38 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: Help me out. What happened in 1980? My favorite President was elected. I eventually came around to that point of view also. He had a way of keeping things in perspective. He was an optimist and his optimism was infectious; a characteristic of leadership. People generally respond much better to a positive, "can do" attitude than a "the sky is falling, I'll save you" approach we see so much of today. Eisboch |
AT&T offer's VOIP
Eisboch wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message ... HK wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:22:25 -0500, HK wrote: Your 49' RV sank at the dock, but was hoisted out and fixed up. Nope, not even built yet. I hope you're not referring to the election of Ronald Reagan. We could use someone with his common sense approach to leadership and management right now. Please. Our ATC system has never recovered, and is rapidly heading straight down the tubes. They played the strike card and RWR played the you are fired card. The system recovered. It is the incompetent government contracting method that has caused the problems. It's the result of over crowded flight paths, antiquated equipment and increased demand for flights. The people in the ATC system do an amazing job under the circumstances. It has nothing to do with Ronny Wrinkles busting an illegal strike 20 years ago. Eisboch Of course not! Hehehe. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote: "BAR" wrote in message ... HK wrote: Wayne.B wrote: On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 20:22:25 -0500, HK wrote: Your 49' RV sank at the dock, but was hoisted out and fixed up. Nope, not even built yet. I hope you're not referring to the election of Ronald Reagan. We could use someone with his common sense approach to leadership and management right now. Please. Our ATC system has never recovered, and is rapidly heading straight down the tubes. They played the strike card and RWR played the you are fired card. The system recovered. It is the incompetent government contracting method that has caused the problems. It's the result of over crowded flight paths, antiquated equipment and increased demand for flights. The people in the ATC system do an amazing job under the circumstances. It has nothing to do with Ronny Wrinkles busting an illegal strike 20 years ago. Eisboch Of course not! Hehehe. Harry, The ATC workers went on strike because they wanted a more money, a reduced work week and a better retirement package. They did not address or express any concerns about flight paths, equipment or an increase in customer traffic. Has anyone told you that your little hehehe does nothing to further a discussion, but is very patronizing. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 17:29:07 -0500, HK wrote:
John H. wrote: On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 22:04:30 GMT, Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Sun, 9 Dec 2007 15:41:26 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... Look into it sometime and see what havoc the sub-prime market is having on smaller Eurpoean countries. It's scary. You just made an extremely good point, Tom. The current housing/credit crisis is not a USA specific issue or problem. It's world-wide. I just read an article about a small town in Norway that is into CDOs structured on sub-prime debt and they don't have enough money to fund their social retirement system and local government. The Dutch, who have a 63% income tax, are also having some dislocations due to CDOs. The viability of their social system is comeing under severe pressure. The media and spin artists give the impression that it's unique to the continued downfall of the USA. I agree. The Dutch are beginning to see the light regarding their social welfare system. The problem is that many of the voters are the ones receiving the welfare. Guess who they continue to vote for. They invited their immigration problem, and it's burying them. Nothing like that could ever happen in this country, of course. This country has been sliding into hell since 1980, and will continue its journey until it gets there. You may be correct. We seem to be headed very much in the same direction as the Dutch. Time will tell. -- John H |
AT&T offer's VOIP
"HK" wrote in message . .. Eisboch wrote: It's the result of over crowded flight paths, antiquated equipment and increased demand for flights. The people in the ATC system do an amazing job under the circumstances. It has nothing to do with Ronny Wrinkles busting an illegal strike 20 years ago. Eisboch Of course not! Hehehe. Correct me if I am wrong. Because of the massive negative affect on US transportation, both personnel and commerce, the ATC strike was illegal, even under the union contract conditions. Being illegal gave the executive branch of the federal government the authority to intervene in behalf and in the interest of the general population. So, you are of the opinion that the ATC union had the right to ignore the law and go on strike anyway? Reagan did exactly the right thing and it wasn't unilateral. The union was well advised of the consequences of a system shutdown and were strongly encouraged to continue contract negotiations without violating the law. They ignored the opportunities and got what they deserved. It's amazing how the spin is applied 20 years later to support a political agenda. I suppose if one says something loud enough and often enough some people will begin to believe it. Again, please correct me if I am in error. Eisboch |
AT&T offer's VOIP
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
Has anyone told you that your little hehehe does nothing to further a discussion, but is very patronizing. Go pee up a rope, Reggie. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
"HK" wrote in message . .. Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Heh ... that's basically what the ATC said to Reagan in 1981. Didn't work. :-) Here's something to refresh your memory: http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id296.htm Eisboch |
AT&T offer's VOIP
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message . .. Eisboch wrote: It's the result of over crowded flight paths, antiquated equipment and increased demand for flights. The people in the ATC system do an amazing job under the circumstances. It has nothing to do with Ronny Wrinkles busting an illegal strike 20 years ago. Eisboch Of course not! Hehehe. Correct me if I am wrong. Because of the massive negative affect on US transportation, both personnel and commerce, the ATC strike was illegal, even under the union contract conditions. Being illegal gave the executive branch of the federal government the authority to intervene in behalf and in the interest of the general population. So, you are of the opinion that the ATC union had the right to ignore the law and go on strike anyway? Reagan did exactly the right thing and it wasn't unilateral. The union was well advised of the consequences of a system shutdown and were strongly encouraged to continue contract negotiations without violating the law. They ignored the opportunities and got what they deserved. It's amazing how the spin is applied 20 years later to support a political agenda. I suppose if one says something loud enough and often enough some people will begin to believe it. Again, please correct me if I am in error. Eisboch Reagan wanted to show he had balls, so he busted a union. I've always opposed legal restrictions on the right to strike. In the early 1970s, I was pleased to be involved in a number of "illegal" teachers' union strikes in Michigan, Indiana and New York. I always thought Reagan was a charlatan because of his involvement in the Iranian hostage crisis, his double-dealing with the Iranians later to sell them arms, his budget-busting deficit spending on military wastage, et cetera. I often wondered when in his terms he began to deteriorate mentally because of his illness. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
"HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message . .. Eisboch wrote: It's the result of over crowded flight paths, antiquated equipment and increased demand for flights. The people in the ATC system do an amazing job under the circumstances. It has nothing to do with Ronny Wrinkles busting an illegal strike 20 years ago. Eisboch Of course not! Hehehe. Correct me if I am wrong. Because of the massive negative affect on US transportation, both personnel and commerce, the ATC strike was illegal, even under the union contract conditions. Being illegal gave the executive branch of the federal government the authority to intervene in behalf and in the interest of the general population. So, you are of the opinion that the ATC union had the right to ignore the law and go on strike anyway? Reagan did exactly the right thing and it wasn't unilateral. The union was well advised of the consequences of a system shutdown and were strongly encouraged to continue contract negotiations without violating the law. They ignored the opportunities and got what they deserved. It's amazing how the spin is applied 20 years later to support a political agenda. I suppose if one says something loud enough and often enough some people will begin to believe it. Again, please correct me if I am in error. Eisboch Reagan wanted to show he had balls, so he busted a union. I've always opposed legal restrictions on the right to strike. In the early 1970s, I was pleased to be involved in a number of "illegal" teachers' union strikes in Michigan, Indiana and New York. I always thought Reagan was a charlatan because of his involvement in the Iranian hostage crisis, his double-dealing with the Iranians later to sell them arms, his budget-busting deficit spending on military wastage, et cetera. I often wondered when in his terms he began to deteriorate mentally because of his illness. So if laws don't fit in with your philosophy, it's OK to break them? |
AT&T offer's VOIP
"HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message . .. Eisboch wrote: It's the result of over crowded flight paths, antiquated equipment and increased demand for flights. The people in the ATC system do an amazing job under the circumstances. It has nothing to do with Ronny Wrinkles busting an illegal strike 20 years ago. Eisboch Of course not! Hehehe. Correct me if I am wrong. Because of the massive negative affect on US transportation, both personnel and commerce, the ATC strike was illegal, even under the union contract conditions. Being illegal gave the executive branch of the federal government the authority to intervene in behalf and in the interest of the general population. So, you are of the opinion that the ATC union had the right to ignore the law and go on strike anyway? Reagan did exactly the right thing and it wasn't unilateral. The union was well advised of the consequences of a system shutdown and were strongly encouraged to continue contract negotiations without violating the law. They ignored the opportunities and got what they deserved. It's amazing how the spin is applied 20 years later to support a political agenda. I suppose if one says something loud enough and often enough some people will begin to believe it. Again, please correct me if I am in error. Eisboch Reagan wanted to show he had balls, so he busted a union. I've always opposed legal restrictions on the right to strike. In the early 1970s, I was pleased to be involved in a number of "illegal" teachers' union strikes in Michigan, Indiana and New York. Well, with all due respect, the fact that you have always opposed legal restrictions on the right to strike doesn't change the fact that that Congress determined it to be illegal in 1955 (for federal employees) and the Supreme Court determined the law to be constitutional when challenged in 1971. You have been out voted. I always thought Reagan was a charlatan because of his involvement in the Iranian hostage crisis, his double-dealing with the Iranians later to sell them arms, his budget-busting deficit spending on military wastage, et cetera. I often wondered when in his terms he began to deteriorate mentally because of his illness. You are entitled to think what you want but consider: In the aftermath of more recent crises .... the fed's response (or lack of) to natural disasters like Katrina, wildfires, etc., the actions of the FAA in 1981, in terms of developing a contingency plan to keep air transportation going in the event of an illegal strike, would today be considered to be masterfully executed and Reagan's administration would be congratulated. Eisboch |
AT&T offer's VOIP
D.Duck wrote:
"HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message . .. Eisboch wrote: It's the result of over crowded flight paths, antiquated equipment and increased demand for flights. The people in the ATC system do an amazing job under the circumstances. It has nothing to do with Ronny Wrinkles busting an illegal strike 20 years ago. Eisboch Of course not! Hehehe. Correct me if I am wrong. Because of the massive negative affect on US transportation, both personnel and commerce, the ATC strike was illegal, even under the union contract conditions. Being illegal gave the executive branch of the federal government the authority to intervene in behalf and in the interest of the general population. So, you are of the opinion that the ATC union had the right to ignore the law and go on strike anyway? Reagan did exactly the right thing and it wasn't unilateral. The union was well advised of the consequences of a system shutdown and were strongly encouraged to continue contract negotiations without violating the law. They ignored the opportunities and got what they deserved. It's amazing how the spin is applied 20 years later to support a political agenda. I suppose if one says something loud enough and often enough some people will begin to believe it. Again, please correct me if I am in error. Eisboch Reagan wanted to show he had balls, so he busted a union. I've always opposed legal restrictions on the right to strike. In the early 1970s, I was pleased to be involved in a number of "illegal" teachers' union strikes in Michigan, Indiana and New York. I always thought Reagan was a charlatan because of his involvement in the Iranian hostage crisis, his double-dealing with the Iranians later to sell them arms, his budget-busting deficit spending on military wastage, et cetera. I often wondered when in his terms he began to deteriorate mentally because of his illness. So if laws don't fit in with your philosophy, it's OK to break them? It all depends on "the laws." If you recall, in certain parts of this country, it was against the law to teach about evolution in the public classrooms. It was against the law for people of color to drink from certain public drinking fountains, ride in the front of the bus, stay in certain hotels, and so on and so forth. So, yes, if certain laws don't fit in with my philosophy, it is OK to break them. In fact, one is morally compelled to break them. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message . .. Eisboch wrote: It's the result of over crowded flight paths, antiquated equipment and increased demand for flights. The people in the ATC system do an amazing job under the circumstances. It has nothing to do with Ronny Wrinkles busting an illegal strike 20 years ago. Eisboch Of course not! Hehehe. Correct me if I am wrong. Because of the massive negative affect on US transportation, both personnel and commerce, the ATC strike was illegal, even under the union contract conditions. Being illegal gave the executive branch of the federal government the authority to intervene in behalf and in the interest of the general population. So, you are of the opinion that the ATC union had the right to ignore the law and go on strike anyway? Reagan did exactly the right thing and it wasn't unilateral. The union was well advised of the consequences of a system shutdown and were strongly encouraged to continue contract negotiations without violating the law. They ignored the opportunities and got what they deserved. It's amazing how the spin is applied 20 years later to support a political agenda. I suppose if one says something loud enough and often enough some people will begin to believe it. Again, please correct me if I am in error. Eisboch Reagan wanted to show he had balls, so he busted a union. I've always opposed legal restrictions on the right to strike. In the early 1970s, I was pleased to be involved in a number of "illegal" teachers' union strikes in Michigan, Indiana and New York. Well, with all due respect, the fact that you have always opposed legal restrictions on the right to strike doesn't change the fact that that Congress determined it to be illegal in 1955 (for federal employees) and the Supreme Court determined the law to be constitutional when challenged in 1971. You have been out voted. I always thought Reagan was a charlatan because of his involvement in the Iranian hostage crisis, his double-dealing with the Iranians later to sell them arms, his budget-busting deficit spending on military wastage, et cetera. I often wondered when in his terms he began to deteriorate mentally because of his illness. You are entitled to think what you want but consider: In the aftermath of more recent crises .... the fed's response (or lack of) to natural disasters like Katrina, wildfires, etc., the actions of the FAA in 1981, in terms of developing a contingency plan to keep air transportation going in the event of an illegal strike, would today be considered to be masterfully executed and Reagan's administration would be congratulated. Eisboch Yeah, and Mussolini kept the trains running on time. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote: Has anyone told you that your little hehehe does nothing to further a discussion, but is very patronizing. Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Well that certainly contributed to the discussion. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote: Reginald P. Smithers III wrote: Has anyone told you that your little hehehe does nothing to further a discussion, but is very patronizing. Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Well that certainly contributed to the discussion. More than you usually do. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
"HK" wrote in message . .. Eisboch wrote: In the aftermath of more recent crises .... the fed's response (or lack of) to natural disasters like Katrina, wildfires, etc., the actions of the FAA in 1981, in terms of developing a contingency plan to keep air transportation going in the event of an illegal strike, would today be considered to be masterfully executed and Reagan's administration would be congratulated. Eisboch Yeah, and Mussolini kept the trains running on time. LOL. I have to give you credit Harry. You ardently stick to and believe what you want to believe. Kinda like GW Bush in a way ..... an admirable trait if you happen to be right. Eisboch |
AT&T offer's VOIP
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 08:11:45 -0500, HK wrote:
I always thought Reagan was a charlatan because of his involvement in the Iranian hostage crisis, his double-dealing with the Iranians later to sell them arms, his budget-busting deficit spending on military wastage, et cetera. I often wondered when in his terms he began to deteriorate mentally because of his illness. PATCO got what they deserved for supporting him in the 1980 election. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote: HK wrote: Reginald P. Smithers III wrote: Has anyone told you that your little hehehe does nothing to further a discussion, but is very patronizing. Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Well that certainly contributed to the discussion. More than you usually do. Harry, I thought you might like this. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYo1-tc9Mzw |
AT&T offer's VOIP
On Mon, 10 Dec 2007 08:27:29 -0500, Eisboch wrote:
In the aftermath of more recent crises .... the fed's response (or lack of) to natural disasters like Katrina, wildfires, etc., the actions of the FAA in 1981, in terms of developing a contingency plan to keep air transportation going in the event of an illegal strike, would today be considered to be masterfully executed and Reagan's administration would be congratulated. Eisboch Except the contingency plan was Jimmy Carter's. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
"HK" wrote in message . .. So, yes, if certain laws don't fit in with my philosophy, it is OK to break them. In fact, one is morally compelled to break them. In a nation founded on laws, I wish you had said "morally compelled to change them". Eisboch |
AT&T offer's VOIP
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message . .. So, yes, if certain laws don't fit in with my philosophy, it is OK to break them. In fact, one is morally compelled to break them. In a nation founded on laws, I wish you had said "morally compelled to change them". Eisboch "if certain laws don't fit in with my philosophy, it is OK to break them" is actually the definition of Anarchy. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message . .. So, yes, if certain laws don't fit in with my philosophy, it is OK to break them. In fact, one is morally compelled to break them. In a nation founded on laws, I wish you had said "morally compelled to change them". Eisboch This nation runs on greed, not law. |
AT&T offer's VOIP
HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message . .. So, yes, if certain laws don't fit in with my philosophy, it is OK to break them. In fact, one is morally compelled to break them. In a nation founded on laws, I wish you had said "morally compelled to change them". Eisboch This nation runs on greed, not law. While greed is the basis of the free market system, the nation is run on laws. |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:56 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com