"Boater" wrote in message
...
Don White wrote: wrote in message
...
On Nov 13, 2:38 am, "Eisboch" wrote:
I don't consider UAW members "slobs", but I agree with his overall
assesment.

I was a bit over the top with that. I don't really blame the workers,
they're just taking advantage of the high-paying jobs available to
them. The UAW is specifically the one to blame here, by forcing the
automakers into paying this kind of money to unskilled workers,
ultimately bringing about the death of the entire American auto
industry.

It's past time to break the unions and come back to reality. They've
outlived their usefulness, and turned into leeches on society as a
whole.


It's way past time to break the corporate mentality and start over.
Corporations have outlived their usefulness, and turned into leeches on
society.

It's corpoprate greed that has sold us all down the river.
We see it locally in our electric power company.
They have a monopoly, so are always looking to raise the rates while the
senior execs earn 44% over managers in comparable positions in the rest of
the country.

"Boater" wrote in message
...


I should have "positive" feelings about our involvement in Vietnam? With
55,000 dead Americans, tens of thousands more seriously injured, billions
of our dollars wasted, millions of Asians dead, and nothing to show for
our "investment" there other than huge profits for the military-industrial
complex?

Hell, we didn't even learn any lessons from that debacle.

Tell me, Richard, what did we gain from that war?
What were we doing there, besides propping up a series of corrupt
right-wing dictators?

Vietnam was screwed by the French, the Japanese, the allies after WW II,
the French again, and then the Americans. All they wanted was us the hell
out of their country.


I understand. I also understand the point Vic made. It was a different
time, a different era
and many of us that participated did so because we thought we were doing the
right thing.
You continue to harp on the subject, making negative comments of those that
responded to the times in a different world and without benefit of playing
Monday morning quarterback like you can.

Let me ask you this: When the troops finally come home from Iraq are you
going to start chastising them for volunteering because *you* didn't agree
with the war?

If you are consistent, I'll bet you will.

Eisboch

On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:24:18 -0500, Jim wrote:

Boater wrote:
Jim wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:38:58 +0000, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 02:12:16 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

My hope is that the GM/Ford/Chrysler problems are resolved (if
resolvable) in bankruptcy, not throwing more tax payer dollars at
them.


Duck, I couldn't agree with you more. Chapter 11 isn't
permanent. It
allows for "reorganization" which is exactly what the auto industry
needs to do right now. Revise business plans, products and
re-negotiate the union contracts under the watchful eye of a
bankruptcy
judge.

Handing them a pile of taxpayer money, calling it a government
"investment" just to keep them in business under their current
organizational structures won't do a damn thing.
I agree.

Tough call. I don't like these bailouts, but can we afford not to?
In this country, 1 in 10 jobs are connected to the auto industry. If
the auto companies fail, we're talking depression, not recession.
All of this, could get real scary, real quick.

Busting the unions should be a requisite part of any bailout plan.
Otherwise they will be back again in a few years looking for another
handout. It's time we earn from our mistakes and stop repeating them.


This from a guy whose career highlight was cleaning the heads aboard a
navy ship?

We used to send numb-nuts like you all over the ship looking for
replacements for burned out headlights.

You do realize many Navy ships have carried vehicles. And if you
checked one and a headlight was out, you got one from stores. And
gofers generally ask where to get the stuff.

Casady

Richard Casady wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:24:18 -0500, Jim wrote:

Boater wrote:
Jim wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:38:58 +0000, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 02:12:16 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"D.Duck" wrote in message
...
My hope is that the GM/Ford/Chrysler problems are resolved (if
resolvable) in bankruptcy, not throwing more tax payer dollars at
them.


Duck, I couldn't agree with you more. Chapter 11 isn't
permanent. It
allows for "reorganization" which is exactly what the auto industry
needs to do right now. Revise business plans, products and
re-negotiate the union contracts under the watchful eye of a
bankruptcy
judge.

Handing them a pile of taxpayer money, calling it a government
"investment" just to keep them in business under their current
organizational structures won't do a damn thing.
I agree.
Tough call. I don't like these bailouts, but can we afford not to?
In this country, 1 in 10 jobs are connected to the auto industry. If
the auto companies fail, we're talking depression, not recession.
All of this, could get real scary, real quick.
Busting the unions should be a requisite part of any bailout plan.
Otherwise they will be back again in a few years looking for another
handout. It's time we earn from our mistakes and stop repeating them.

This from a guy whose career highlight was cleaning the heads aboard a
navy ship?
We used to send numb-nuts like you all over the ship looking for
replacements for burned out headlights.

You do realize many Navy ships have carried vehicles. And if you
checked one and a headlight was out, you got one from stores. And
gofers generally ask where to get the stuff.

Casady


No wonder wars last so long.

"Richard Casady" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:24:18 -0500, Jim wrote:

Boater wrote:
Jim wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:38:58 +0000, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 02:12:16 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"D.Duck" wrote in message
...

My hope is that the GM/Ford/Chrysler problems are resolved (if
resolvable) in bankruptcy, not throwing more tax payer dollars at
them.


Duck, I couldn't agree with you more. Chapter 11 isn't
permanent. It
allows for "reorganization" which is exactly what the auto industry
needs to do right now. Revise business plans, products and
re-negotiate the union contracts under the watchful eye of a
bankruptcy
judge.

Handing them a pile of taxpayer money, calling it a government
"investment" just to keep them in business under their current
organizational structures won't do a damn thing.
I agree.

Tough call. I don't like these bailouts, but can we afford not to?
In this country, 1 in 10 jobs are connected to the auto industry. If
the auto companies fail, we're talking depression, not recession.
All of this, could get real scary, real quick.

Busting the unions should be a requisite part of any bailout plan.
Otherwise they will be back again in a few years looking for another
handout. It's time we earn from our mistakes and stop repeating them.


This from a guy whose career highlight was cleaning the heads aboard a
navy ship?

We used to send numb-nuts like you all over the ship looking for
replacements for burned out headlights.

You do realize many Navy ships have carried vehicles. And if you
checked one and a headlight was out, you got one from stores. And
gofers generally ask where to get the stuff.

Casady

~~ Snerk ~~
Guess the joke was usually on Jimbo.

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

I should have "positive" feelings about our involvement in Vietnam? With
55,000 dead Americans, tens of thousands more seriously injured, billions
of our dollars wasted, millions of Asians dead, and nothing to show for
our "investment" there other than huge profits for the military-industrial
complex?

Hell, we didn't even learn any lessons from that debacle.

Tell me, Richard, what did we gain from that war?
What were we doing there, besides propping up a series of corrupt
right-wing dictators?

Vietnam was screwed by the French, the Japanese, the allies after WW II,
the French again, and then the Americans. All they wanted was us the hell
out of their country.


I understand. I also understand the point Vic made. It was a different
time, a different era
and many of us that participated did so because we thought we were doing the
right thing.
You continue to harp on the subject, making negative comments of those that
responded to the times in a different world and without benefit of playing
Monday morning quarterback like you can.

Let me ask you this: When the troops finally come home from Iraq are you
going to start chastising them for volunteering because *you* didn't agree
with the war?

If you are consistent, I'll bet you will.

Eisboch




I don't fault those who volunteered specifically for Bush's war...after
all, they were lied to by the Bush Administration, too. More recently, I
suspect there are far fewer new volunteers for Iraq than there are
volunteers for the military as an employer of last resort. Times are
pretty tough, and the military is hiring. You figure it out.

I also don't fault those who served in Vietnam. I do have problems with
those who think they were involved in something over there that had
anything to do with keeping the United States safe from foreign attack.

It's the war I find disgusting, and those who try to glorify it or their
role in it. Too many young men of that era had no reasonable ability or
way to avoid the draft, were sucked into the military, and got killed or
maimed, and for no good reason.

Don White wrote:
"Richard Casady" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:24:18 -0500, Jim wrote:

Boater wrote:
Jim wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:38:58 +0000, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 02:12:16 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"D.Duck" wrote in message
...
My hope is that the GM/Ford/Chrysler problems are resolved (if
resolvable) in bankruptcy, not throwing more tax payer dollars at
them.


Duck, I couldn't agree with you more. Chapter 11 isn't
permanent. It
allows for "reorganization" which is exactly what the auto industry
needs to do right now. Revise business plans, products and
re-negotiate the union contracts under the watchful eye of a
bankruptcy
judge.

Handing them a pile of taxpayer money, calling it a government
"investment" just to keep them in business under their current
organizational structures won't do a damn thing.
I agree.
Tough call. I don't like these bailouts, but can we afford not to?
In this country, 1 in 10 jobs are connected to the auto industry. If
the auto companies fail, we're talking depression, not recession.
All of this, could get real scary, real quick.
Busting the unions should be a requisite part of any bailout plan.
Otherwise they will be back again in a few years looking for another
handout. It's time we earn from our mistakes and stop repeating them.

This from a guy whose career highlight was cleaning the heads aboard a
navy ship?
We used to send numb-nuts like you all over the ship looking for
replacements for burned out headlights.
You do realize many Navy ships have carried vehicles. And if you
checked one and a headlight was out, you got one from stores. And
gofers generally ask where to get the stuff.

Casady

~~ Snerk ~~
Guess the joke was usually on Jimbo.




My guess is that FloridaJim *was* the joke his entire time aboard ship.

Boater wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

I should have "positive" feelings about our involvement in Vietnam?
With 55,000 dead Americans, tens of thousands more seriously injured,
billions of our dollars wasted, millions of Asians dead, and nothing
to show for our "investment" there other than huge profits for the
military-industrial complex?

Hell, we didn't even learn any lessons from that debacle.

Tell me, Richard, what did we gain from that war?
What were we doing there, besides propping up a series of corrupt
right-wing dictators?

Vietnam was screwed by the French, the Japanese, the allies after WW
II, the French again, and then the Americans. All they wanted was us
the hell out of their country.


I understand. I also understand the point Vic made. It was a
different time, a different era
and many of us that participated did so because we thought we were
doing the right thing.
You continue to harp on the subject, making negative comments of those
that responded to the times in a different world and without benefit
of playing Monday morning quarterback like you can.

Let me ask you this: When the troops finally come home from Iraq are
you going to start chastising them for volunteering because *you*
didn't agree with the war?

If you are consistent, I'll bet you will.

Eisboch




I don't fault those who volunteered specifically for Bush's war...after
all, they were lied to by the Bush Administration, too. More recently, I
suspect there are far fewer new volunteers for Iraq than there are
volunteers for the military as an employer of last resort. Times are
pretty tough, and the military is hiring. You figure it out.

I also don't fault those who served in Vietnam. I do have problems with
those who think they were involved in something over there that had
anything to do with keeping the United States safe from foreign attack.

It's the war I find disgusting, and those who try to glorify it or their
role in it. Too many young men of that era had no reasonable ability or
way to avoid the draft, were sucked into the military, and got killed or
maimed, and for no good reason.

And a miserable piece of poo like you, who most of us find repulsive,
gets a free pass. There is no justice.

Boater wrote:
Don White wrote:
"Richard Casady" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:24:18 -0500, Jim wrote:

Boater wrote:
Jim wrote:
wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:38:58 +0000, Tom Francis - SWSports wrote:

On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 02:12:16 -0500, "Eisboch"
wrote:


"D.Duck" wrote in message
...
My hope is that the GM/Ford/Chrysler problems are resolved (if
resolvable) in bankruptcy, not throwing more tax payer dollars at
them.


Duck, I couldn't agree with you more. Chapter 11 isn't
permanent. It
allows for "reorganization" which is exactly what the auto
industry
needs to do right now. Revise business plans, products and
re-negotiate the union contracts under the watchful eye of a
bankruptcy
judge.

Handing them a pile of taxpayer money, calling it a government
"investment" just to keep them in business under their current
organizational structures won't do a damn thing.
I agree.
Tough call. I don't like these bailouts, but can we afford not to?
In this country, 1 in 10 jobs are connected to the auto
industry. If
the auto companies fail, we're talking depression, not recession.
All of this, could get real scary, real quick.
Busting the unions should be a requisite part of any bailout plan.
Otherwise they will be back again in a few years looking for another
handout. It's time we earn from our mistakes and stop repeating them.

This from a guy whose career highlight was cleaning the heads aboard a
navy ship?
We used to send numb-nuts like you all over the ship looking for
replacements for burned out headlights.
You do realize many Navy ships have carried vehicles. And if you
checked one and a headlight was out, you got one from stores. And
gofers generally ask where to get the stuff.

Casady

~~ Snerk ~~
Guess the joke was usually on Jimbo.



My guess is that FloridaJim *was* the joke his entire time aboard ship.

Here's a riddle for you. Who's salary history is exhibited on the internet?

On Thu, 13 Nov 2008 08:03:38 -0600, wrote:

Like a hurricane every 100 years or so, it is going to require cleaning
out the deadwood before the forests can grow again.

In a climax forest the grounded is littered with dead trees. It takes
about as long for a tree to rot away as it took to grow it. In the
process all the oxygen produced by its growth will be used up, and all
the carbon fixed by it will go back into the atmosphere.