If you've been student of politics on the internet for more than a few years, you've no doubt seen variations on what your political ideology is. With Democrats recently having taken control of congress and the Right wondering where to head after big losses in 2006, I think it's time to break down what I think defines a person's political ideology. The following is my attempt to do this:
Moral: Religion, censorship, science, and sexuality.
Social: Race, regulation, the welfare state
Foreign policy: America's cultural place in the world, military interventions
Fiscal: Taxation, spending
Organizational: Unionization, regulating politics
Tell me if you think I've missed any broad topics that should be in here. Then, head over to the Pew Center's political Typology Test and see where you fit in. I have a poll at the bottom of the sidebar where you can say which group you're in. I did notice two flaws in the poll, though: It skews your results if you say which ideology you think you are.
The poll also seems to not know how to handle libertarian-inclined people as too well, either, wanting to classify us (yes, I'm outing myself) as either "Enterpriser" or "Liberal" depending on what your self-identified ideology is. For purposes of my poll, if you think you are misquoted as Enterpriser, choose "Upbeat."
Comments Policy
I am a single male product of
January 26, 2007 - 19:19 ET by ucI am a single male product of the post Kennedy years that gave not just Catholic girls equal rights, while, only, giving, sons, of such generation, the feeling, that, they, were, making the rules up as they went along >> you know not basing decisions on centuries of wisdom.
It called me an enterpriser,
January 26, 2007 - 19:20 ET by AtheistRepublicanIt called me an enterpriser, its close I suppose. I am a libertarian myself but enterpriser fits with my beliefs to. Very interesting questionaire, I love these things. Its nice to get things out of the republican vs. democrat thing. Seriously needs a libertarian option though..
That makes 2 of us
January 26, 2007 - 22:03 ET by libertymanI'm an EX-Libertarian (capital "L"), but I left the LP after I read George Washington's Farewell Addrerss...& like u, I also came across as an "Enterpriser".
But I had some major difficulties answering many of the questions. Personally, I come from a Constitutionist viewpoint, not Republicrat/Demolican, & not Left or Right. I had to admit that I leaned Republican (UGH!), but that was 'cuz that was the closest answer that came to what my inner principles belong....I guess one could say that I belong on the FAR Right, possibly (I consider President Bush to be a big-government globalist moderate, REGARDLESS what the political Left might say).
"I consider President Bu
January 26, 2007 - 22:20 ET by Eric Turner"I consider President Bush to be a big-government globalist moderate, REGARDLESS what the political Left might say)."
Libertyman, I'm right there with you brother. I'd probably join the Constitution Party if I thought it would do any good.
And I'm an Enterpriser too.
AKA: armyvet
Correct me if I am wrong bu
January 26, 2007 - 22:32 ET by Conservative VoiceCorrect me if I am wrong but the Constitution Party is againt the Iraq war as they tend to be isolationists. How are they enterprisers?
You are right. They are isola
January 26, 2007 - 22:50 ET by Eric TurnerYou are right. They are isolationists. Isolationism is something I've struggled with for years as to whether I am for/against. But when your own party (GOP) is continually not listening to its members where do you turn? The Republican party itself has welcomed isolationists into its fold throughout its history. It has often advocated an isolationist policy for the U.S.
Part of me says we should not be isolationists for obvious reasons. But also because (like a radical) I want to export the American Revolution to other countries - the ideas of freedom, personal liberties, etc. But also part of me says, (excuse the vernacular) but screw 'em. They don't want us involved - we won't be involved.
George Washington urged us to stay out of external foreign matters himself.
"'Tis our true policy to steer clear of permanent Alliances, with any portion of the foreign world. So far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it, for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements (I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy). I repeat it therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them.
Taking care always to keep ourselves, by suitable establishments, on a respectably defensive posture, we may safely trust to temporary alliances for extraordinary emergencies." - George Washington
AKA: armyvet
On isolationism
January 26, 2007 - 22:55 ET by UnsaneRead in the historical context, it made sense that the United States should stay out of "foreign entanglements" at that time, when it was still just getting on its feet. George Washington never envisioned the United States being a superpower with a global presence.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Please don't misunderstand my
January 26, 2007 - 23:04 ET by Eric TurnerPlease don't misunderstand my comments to reflect a genuine desire to be a strict isolationist. I prefaced my entire statement by calling into fact my struggle with it. That said, Thomas Jefferson, himself, sent a fleet to the Barbary Coast to rid ourselves of 18th century terrorism. When we find ourselves attacked - wherever that might be, we must go to the source of it and extinguish it. And in that regard we cannot be isolationists.
I guess I'm saying it's a balance you know?
AKA: armyvet
Matt...Here's a definition of
January 26, 2007 - 19:36 ET by Clear thinkerMatt...
Here's a definition of conservative that I am very fond of...
We define a conservative as one who seeks to preserve the best aspects of western culture, including the Judeo-Christian values and free market economics enshrined in our Constitution - those things that made America the freest, most prosperous nation on earth. A conservative rejects the failed philosophies of Rousseau and Marx, that have bankrupted every nation that has embraced them, and caused more deaths in the "people's republics", than all of the world's wars combined.
I am an Enterpriser. I just c
January 26, 2007 - 20:04 ET by Roger the ShrubberI am an Enterpriser. I just can't choose which model I should be...NCC-1701? 1701A? C? D? E?
Rog,I'm an Enterpriser too.
January 26, 2007 - 20:09 ET by BlondeRog,
I'm an Enterpriser too.
Picard's Enterprise.
Although I'd miss my (red) doberman, Spock!
P.S. You still owe me that $1 for correctly identifying haysie as the lovely fellow with the yellow peace signs painted all over his scrawny bod. Oh, right, sorry, I forgot...I asked you to buy yourself a beer for that incredibly funny link.
great minds think alike, co
January 26, 2007 - 20:29 ET by Conservative Voicegreat minds think alike, count me as one as well.
CV,Count you as what? An en
January 26, 2007 - 20:38 ET by BlondeCV,
Count you as what? An enterpriser? Gotcha.
Or as a red doberman owner....with a mutt named Spock?
Man....I miss that dog. He's been gone ten years now, I suspect it may be an appropriate time to replace him. Up 'til now, I haven't had the heart to do it (although I had a super duper ex-racing mutt, Wiley the greyhound, in the interim).
Okay....searching the rescue sites this weekend.
Thanks, CV. I needed that kick over the cliff.
lol, too funny, yes an ente
January 26, 2007 - 20:42 ET by Conservative Voicelol, too funny, yes an enterpriser
How can you guys like the
January 26, 2007 - 20:57 ET by JerryHow can you guys like the enterprise?
War mongers! War for Dilithium crystals! Blood for Dilithium crystals!
They could have negotiated with the Klingons and avoided all that senseless killing!
Captain Kirk = Hitler!
Every week it was another quagmire! Everyone knew that evil Mr. Spock was the brains behind the whole operation, with that Vulcan mind meld thing, you know he controlled "captain chimp".
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment
vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any
President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
Tribbles for oil!You are SUCH
January 26, 2007 - 21:16 ET by Roger the ShrubberTribbles for oil!
You are SUCH a Cardassian!
Cheney = Spock.Wait...I'm con
January 26, 2007 - 21:23 ET by BlondeCheney = Spock.
Wait...I'm confused.....I am blonde, after all.
I thought it was
Cheney = Darth Vader.
Help me danbo....I am stuck here in IRAK.
Irak? I thought it was Ira
January 26, 2007 - 21:48 ET by JerryIrak? I thought it was Irak Obama?
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment
vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any
President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
Jerr,Thanks for the hand up a
January 26, 2007 - 21:54 ET by BlondeJerr,
Thanks for the hand up and out of my quagmire, there, fella.
Wasn't that Saddam Hussein Obama?
Or somesuch.
Help me, danbo....I am stilll stuck here in IRAK.
(danbo will show up...and slay the warmers.....he's cave diving now, tho).
Well, that was a quick 'n eas
January 26, 2007 - 20:34 ET by bigtimerWell, that was a quick 'n easy enterprising test...
I'm enterprising!
...and conservative too....
What else could it be....
I work from home.
That was fun though Matthew...thanks!
There is overlap in most of t
January 26, 2007 - 20:43 ET by crsheddThere is overlap in most of the categories. For example, every political party that has been in power since GWashington have used taxation and spending to attain social goals. Other than the overlap, the catagories work well.
Taxation vs. Theft
January 26, 2007 - 20:53 ET by UnsaneActually, as of late one side of the political aisle (the Left, of course) don't want to tax and spend to attain social goals as much as they want to steal from the producers/successful people in this country to reward/coddle failures.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Oh, Uns..You are wasting band
January 26, 2007 - 21:00 ET by BlondeOh, Uns..
You are wasting bandwidth arguing that with crshedd.
The poster with nine thousand degrees, but not a "shredd" of common sense. LOL.
I could care less what degree
January 26, 2007 - 21:09 ET by NL207I could care less what degrees crshedd has. They won't help him one iota to win a debate here.
NL,Obvious observation (sorry
January 26, 2007 - 21:26 ET by BlondeNL,
Obvious observation (sorry for the apt alliteration).
Trolls are trolls.
Supporting those failures IS
January 26, 2007 - 22:51 ET by crsheddSupporting those failures IS a social goal, maybe not yours, but a social goal nonetheless. You call it stealing, others call it taxation, but your example supports my statement.
except in the case where ev
January 26, 2007 - 22:57 ET by Conservative Voiceexcept in the case where everyone is taxed the same regardless of income level. ie a flat tax
The difference between taxation and stealing for crshedd
January 26, 2007 - 23:01 ET by UnsaneTry grasping the difference between "taxation" and "stealing".
To me, taxation would be the federal government taxing everyone at 15-17% a head, with no exemptions whatsoever, as a necessary evil to fund the functions of government.
Stealing is what we currently have, with the top 40% of wage earners footing nearly the entire federal bill for the bottom 60%. Why? Because some government officials feel they have a claim on what others make and think it is theirs to expropriate whenever they feel like it. Unfortunately, many on this board (including you) feel the same way.
I would think that someone as hyper-intelligent as you are would have grasped that.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
crshedd,Please, please...enum
January 26, 2007 - 23:04 ET by Blondecrshedd,
Please, please...enumerate for us what your "social goals" are.
And while you're at it....why should "social goals" be part of the national agenda.
Yes, I call it stealing.
From my own personal productivity. Why should I support anyone else's "goals" with my own productivity? Just to provide some sort of "social goal?"
I work, I get paid...(okay, go there again and tell me how much more you think you get paid).
Go for it crshedd.
Tell me about your Socialist Goal.
In real sentences. And words. And without Huffpo talking points, please.
Yes, I call it stealing.Actua
January 26, 2007 - 23:09 ET by NeoConfirmedYes, I call it stealing.
Actually Blonde, Shedd likes to think of it as 'Taking with Permission'.
Blonde, Blonde, Blonde.I neve
January 27, 2007 - 00:21 ET by crsheddBlonde, Blonde, Blonde.
I never said taxation and spending (government) were for MY social goals.
The 2 easiest social goals instituted by government, and paid for by taxation are Medicare and Social Security.
Shortly before the beginning of the Cold War some arguments in Congress for increasing the dependent deduction (a tax policy) was to encourage a higher birth rate.
Other tax policies in our tax code include deductions for energy saving improvements to our houses. GWBush instituted the 'SUV deduction' to encourage domestic auto spending. There are many, many more examples of taxation/spending programs that are used to achieve social goals.
The major problem with this policy is that not all can agree on what is a worthy goal to support (or discourage-tax on cigarettes).
All I have said on this post was that the political categories presented were not exclusive, that Fiscal=taxation and spending. My argument is that taxation and spending could also go under the social category.
On Social Security
January 27, 2007 - 00:25 ET by UnsaneThe sad thing is that Social Security (especially!) would work so much better privatized...
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
*non answer*I asked you, spec
January 27, 2007 - 00:31 ET by Blonde*non answer*
I asked you, specifically, what your "social goals" were.
Try again. If you dare.
This time.....answer my question. S'il vous plait, cookie.
Ohh, man. Where to start and
January 27, 2007 - 00:50 ET by crsheddOhh, man. Where to start and where to end.
Okay, just some very basic goals.
No one goes to bed hungry.
Every person gets the best education America can provide. Not dependent on where they live or who they are. On their own for college.
Every person gets good quality health care.
Every person has opportunity (got to have education to achieve)
Every person retires and lives safe and healthy lives.
Those are just a few. How we achieve those goals, of course, is the problem.
My personal belief is that achieving those goals are the responsibility of the government, along with a military. I DO believe in the Preamble:
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."
This tells us what we want for our country. The rest of the Constitution tells us how we will achieve those goals.
But, politics get in the way. Both sides think their way is the only way. The courts have said that the preamble is non-binding, so we have forgotten why we established this country.
The founders, free-marketers all, also felt that all persons and the government were obligated to ensure all had access to these goals.
Now, the process is get all you can for yourself. Period. If someone else lacks any of these lofty goals, it's their fault. I don't think that was the thinking of the founders, nor of the God we cherish.
No one goes to bed hungry.
January 27, 2007 - 01:04 ET by BlondeNo one goes to bed hungry. Fair enough. With enough jobs to go around (without the illegal bounders propping up the workforce)....no problem.
Best education. Hmmm....I already pay mega bucks to provide an education for every Tom, Dick, and Harry's children who move into my neighborhood. Isn't it enough for you that I plan to provide enough money to educate my own children in a "Harvard" style? I'm happy to pay for a bit of everyone else's kids education....but if I want my own kids to have a superior one...hmmmmm...that's on me.
Good quality health care. Why is that a socialistic goal? Why do I have to pay for your health care, or for that of an illegal immigrant? If I need a mammogram, why should that be any of your concern? Thank you ever so much, Hillary. Health care is a commodity. If I wanted it to be a sewer, I'd vote for your plan. NOT.
Every person retires....blah, blah, blah. Why should I support some idiot who spends each and every dollar he or she spends without regard to some eventual retirement? Again. crshedd....your socialistic tendencies come to the fore.
You pose it as a "problem".
Dude, there's no problem here whatsoever.
There is a solution, however.
It is called free choice, free will....PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY.
I don't care to take care of my neighbor. And I would never ask my neighbor to take care of me.
You have shown your true commie colors here, though.
So you can quit "pretending" to be a conservative.
Mr. Fifteen degrees of separation. Seperate yourself from the liberal socialists.....if you can. ..... AS IF.
LOL.
I think it is good for neig
January 27, 2007 - 15:57 ET by Conservative VoiceI think it is good for neighbors to help each other, just not under threat of prison time.
On free healthcare...why not free food? Isn't food more important? Why not free housing? I got to work, how about free gas? free car? I got to stay informed, so can I get a free computer and free internet as well as free cable and a big screen TV (easier on the eyes you know)? I like to read so can I have free books. A library you say? Well I have issues you see, so I demand a free private library in my home. Its my right!
Just like a Leftist, thinking
January 27, 2007 - 20:43 ET by UnsaneJust like a Leftist, thinking the Preamble is the basis of Constitutional Law, and using it to justify a Nanny State.
When has ANYONE been refused "quality health care"? Can you name ONE instance of this? Finally, why is health care 100% immune from the laws of economics?
"No one goes to bed hungry." Why? I gave up on that idea long ago when I realized that quite a few people WANT to go to bed hungry of their own freewill. Why are people poor in this country? Because they desperately WANT to be. Why do we have poverty? Because people WANT to live in poverty. Opportunity abounds ALL around us if we just bother to look.
We sure as all hell aren't going to have quality education as long as it is a jobs program for people with education degrees. ESPECIALLY when it is a government-run monopoly.
Government is NOT here to coddle, spoil, feed, pamper, and baby you. People really need to stop their whining (you especially) and figure out how to manage those things you have listed on your own. Do I ever ask to be a burden on others? No...so why should I permit other people to burden me?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Never Let The Facts Get In The Way Of A Good Bush Bash
January 27, 2007 - 20:38 ET by Junk Science Skepticcrshedd Says:
"GWBush instituted the 'SUV deduction' to encourage domestic auto spending."
Another fine example of media-inspired idiots thinking they know something.
After hearing the infamous "SUV Deduction" story in the MSM for about six months way back then, I did something that the chattering class never did. I went and looked up the rules on the IRS website.
The supposed deduction, part of Section 179 Depreciation, specifically and in plain English, EXCLUDES anything even remotely resembling an SUV, except in the very rare instance where the vehicle is used 100% as a taxi, ambulance or hearse.
The IRS has never been more clear on any topic.
How did the MSM fact-checkers miss this one?
Oh, wait, they don't use fact-checkers any more, never mind.
'every political party since
January 26, 2007 - 21:05 ET by NL207'every political party since ...has used taxation and spending to attain social goals.'
This is tommy rot. Please prove your thesis. Recall that you used the qualifier "every".
How about one of the earliest
January 26, 2007 - 21:20 ET by crsheddHow about one of the earliest self-imposed taxes (that means we passed the law, not the British) in the colonies (1647) known as the Old Deluder Satan Law.
And before you start to 'bloviate', I am not saying ALL taxation and spending is for social goals. I was pointing out that taxation and spending fall under both Financial and Social categories of which this post is about.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ye_olde_deluder_satan_act
And the back pedaling begins.
January 26, 2007 - 22:00 ET by NL207And the back pedaling begins.
You used the qualifier 'all'. To disprove your thesis I need only produce one. I will choose the Jeffersonian Republicans, whose taxes were nearly nil and who entirely opposed social policy by the National Government. They did noty even take a position on slavery beyond the compromise in the original Constitution.
You further more can't even understand your own language. Your original thesis also used the term 'since Washington'. Your present example cites an event which occurred in 1647. This is about 85 years PRIOR to Washington's birth (1732). Now, when you refer to Washington, I trust you DO mean George Washington, the First President of the United Sattes of America, do you not?
"Jefferson felt so stron
January 26, 2007 - 22:19 ET by crshedd"Jefferson felt so strongly about education that he, as a strict constitutional constructionist, submitted to congress an amendment to the constitution to legalize federal support for education in his State of the Union Address, December 2, 1806."
http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/winter96/jefferson.html
'On August 1, 1794, there occ
January 26, 2007 - 22:26 ET by crshedd'On August 1, 1794, there occurred in this country the "Whiskey Rebellion," which offers a few lessons on taxation (especially of the "sin tax" variety), political deal making, George Washington and the advancement of civilization.'
http://www.earlyamer...
Hell, GWashington even raised arms to enforce this 'sin tax', a social goal.
Sorry, I'm not going to go th
January 26, 2007 - 22:26 ET by crsheddSorry, I'm not going to go thru every tax law, spending bill to satisfy you. Tell you what, you go thru every tax law and spending bill of ANY president you want and show me not a single one was passed to attain a social goal. I think even Unsane would agree that all administrations have used taxation and spending to gain social goals. And AGAIN, not EVERY tax and spend bill is for a social goal, such as military, etc.
Just the idea of building post roads, you know to deliver personal, government and business mail (since colonial times) is, in some part, for social reasons.
Give it up.
To establish post offices and post-roads
January 26, 2007 - 23:04 ET by Unsane"Give it up." Translation: "Just admit that I, crshedd, am the smartest human being ever, and with my trillions of degrees, can prove ANYONE wrong on this silly board with little effort."
crshedd, you are cordially invited to read the Constitution's Article I, Chapter 8, Clause 7 sometime, to refute your post office example.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Okay, you got me. The post ro
January 26, 2007 - 23:12 ET by crsheddOkay, you got me. The post roads are provided by Congress, not the Executive Branch. Got carried away with 'government' taxing/spending for social goals. Sorry.
So your translation of my com
January 26, 2007 - 23:15 ET by crsheddSo your translation of my comment means you would go thru EVERY tax/spend bill of EVERY administration to prove the point.
You are a good man, Unsane. Be my guest.
And, I apologize to Blonde-Unsane mentioned my degrees and I am just responding, not 'blathering'!.
In response to an earlier (weeks ago) post-maybe by you- I mention I have 5 degrees. In typical conservative fashion you inflate it to trillions. I guess that kind of thinking is how conservatives have run up our national debt.
5=trillions. ...doh!
Clarification for our resident English major
January 26, 2007 - 23:38 ET by UnsaneAwwwww...does crshedd need some cheese to go with his whine?
Yes, I am going to revert to hyperbole and overstatement for figures of speech, as I am an American (not a Brit, who typically understates; but then, someone with your NONILLIONS OF DEGREES should know this).
I am no party hack; I lay the blame for the deficit at the feet of every politician I see. I do my part by demanding a balanced budget amendment every single year regardless who represents my district, and participating in the electoral process. Not to mention the rest of the voting public: as Tom Clancy once put it, "We should be demanding the same efficiency from government that we demand from GM, but we don't."
Oh, and face it: you come on here bragging endlessly about how smart you are and how many degrees you have, and combine that with a pathetically weak ability to debate (which often degenerates into you whining, as you have done here), and you are going to get truckloads of crap poured onto you for it. Deal with it.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
I do my best NOT to revert to
January 26, 2007 - 23:55 ET by crsheddI do my best NOT to revert to hyperboyle and overstatement. But, hey, that's just me.
I never accused you of being a party hack. Try not to read things into my statements that are not there. I did, however, accuse you of being a conservative. Sorry, my mistake.
I never brag about how smart I am. I only mention my degrees because people on this site keeps bringing up the subject. If you don't want to hear about my degrees (NO, 5 does NOT equal nonillions [?]), don't bring them up. Simple.
Your pathetically weak ability to debate always seems to degenerate into something like SHUT YOUR MOUTH! (as you posted earlier to me). Wow, debaters beware!
As for "SHUT MY MOUTH&qu
January 27, 2007 - 00:21 ET by UnsaneAs for "SHUT MY MOUTH" posted to you earlier: hey, its not my fault that debating you is like debating a whiny teenager who doesn't understand why his parents won't let him/her do (fill in the blank).
At least I shower you with logic and reason. That you choose not to bathe in it is not my fault. I can only lead horses to water. I can't do the rest.
I am a conservative. It's not an accusation if it is true. Unlike you, I am PROUD of what my principles are and fight for them every chance I get, even if it means being highly critical of the Republican party...but then, I'm not a member, so hey, I can say what I want about them with impunity!
Are you trying to state that by not using hyperbole and overstatement that somehow you are the better person? I think it does much to reduce things to absolute absurdity myself; which is an exercise I enjoy doing. Besides, reduction to absurdity is a great debating tactic for those who wish to employ it.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Now, see, Unsane, you are doi
January 27, 2007 - 00:27 ET by crsheddNow, see, Unsane, you are doing it again. Do not read anything into my post that I don't actually say. If I were going to say that I am a better person, then I would say, 'Unsane, I am a better person than you.' That is just an EXAMPLE of what I mean. I am NOT saying I am a better person. You can think it, but I'm not saying it.
Speaking of absurd, reduction is something you do in cooking.
Now, see, crshedd, you are doing it again
January 27, 2007 - 00:34 ET by UnsaneNow see, crshedd, you are doing it again. Stop being a whiny hypocrite. You SCREAMED like a two year old throwing a tantrum because I typed "SHUT YOUR MOUTH", and yet you are demanding that I don't interpret your clear bragging as such? Give me a break.
Reduction can be done in all sorts of disciplines. Ever heard of subtraction in mathematics?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
You had me going there, Unsan
January 27, 2007 - 00:31 ET by crsheddYou had me going there, Unsane!
'...I shower you with logic...'
Like,
5=trillions (sorry, now it nonillions!) You must write the ads for McDonald's!
SHUT YOUR MOUTH!
What other logic do you employ?
Apparently your fine public s
January 27, 2007 - 00:37 ET by UnsaneApparently your fine public school education and your 999 nonillion degrees and assorted honoraria made you so smart that it purged you of an ability to read. Try finding the post where I cited A-Rod's paychecks, read the whole thing like a good boy, and I might give you a nice, big gold star on your paper.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Let me jump in here for Uns.V
January 27, 2007 - 00:38 ET by BlondeLet me jump in here for Uns.
Vous etes un vache!
Oh, Blonde, I always thought
January 27, 2007 - 01:03 ET by crsheddOh, Blonde, I always thought of you as a sweet person.
Well, crshedd,That's what you
January 27, 2007 - 01:10 ET by BlondeWell, crshedd,
That's what you get for "thinking".
I think you left out this log
January 27, 2007 - 00:40 ET by UnsaneI think you left out this logic:
If I were Lee Raymond, I sure as all hell would NOT be in Houston right now...I'd be back in Australia tearing that country up! Especially since it's summertime down there...
The reason I get upset is SIMPLE (especially if you are familiar with the works of Ayn Rand, which I suggest you read, carefully): to me it's the exact same principle of freedom of speech. If you have a censor, who's to say you won't be the offending voice next week?
The exact same with earnings. If you say that $400 million is excessive, who's to say that in a few decades you won't say my IRA isn't excessive?
Not to mention that he earned the money and was paid for it by a corporation that decided that they could. It's not MY problem. Would I have paid Mr. Raymond that amount? I don't know. But if it were my money, it was my call.
This is the exact same argument I used when people were whining about A-Rod's paychecks. I said quite loudly, "Shut up! He is worth $252 million!" Then, predictably, they would all fly off handles, screaming at me about how no one is worth that, blah blah blah...
Then I quite calmly said, "He has to be worth $252 million. Someone across the table from him wrote him that check, didn't he?" Silence. The point being: 1) you really have no business bitching about what others make unless you are paying them, and 2) maybe instead of blasting what a guy/gal is paid, maybe you should ponder why whoever paid them that was worth that much, or 3) quit whining and aspire to the level of excellence that garnered that wage!
Are you experiencing severe headaches reading all that?
Just like an educator: frowning on anyone who DARES work at a MickeyDs. Is it that you are/were too good to work there or do you hate them because they are a successful capitalist enterprise?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Your argument is since I didn
January 27, 2007 - 00:58 ET by crsheddYour argument is since I didn't pay the money for this excessive retirement, then I can't say anything.
Wild guess here. You didn't vote for Pelosi, Clinton, etc. So, with your 'logic' you can't say anything about them. You know, shut your mouth.
Well, actually, I DID vote in
January 27, 2007 - 20:56 ET by UnsaneWell, actually, I DID vote in the election. So I can say what I want about politicians. I have never missed a single election since 18. I registered to vote before I got a driver's license.
And when will you get through your thick overeducated skull that once you pay someone for a good/service, you have zero room to tell that individual or company what to do with that money? I have yet to have a single employer issue directives to me telling me what to do with MY money that I earned. In your world, the world's employers wo
Many moons ago, when I got an allowance, my father decided to try and ban the appearance of heavy-metal albums in the house, because he didn't like them. Some time later, I got my first job, and started getting paid. I began to invest them into some cassettes by Anthrax, Metallica, Megadeth, Iron Maiden, Slayer, etc. My father tried bitching at me about them, but I looked him straight in the eye and said "You can't tell me what to do with this...I earned it and it is my money!" He immediately backed off and learned to live with it.
You ever wonder why I have you pegged as a socialist, crshedd? Because of your attitudes and your deep desire to control to the last penny what people do with their money. You lose control of your money once you exchange it for the good/service that you buy. Don't like it? Then - I'll use the phrase your clearly have a fetish over - SHUT YOUR MOUTH and don't f*#!ing buy from them anymore. And if you STILL hate the system of free enterprise - which you must, consiering your intense desire to control how every last penny is spent in this country, then (prepare for your orgasm, crshedd, for I am sure you will have one) SHUT YOUR MOUTH and move to some other socialist paradise. I'm sure Canada will suit you well - socialist to the core, believers in "peace, order and good government" - and going absolutely nowhere.
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
More confusion. You have five
January 27, 2007 - 09:03 ET by Roger the ShrubberMore confusion. You have five degrees?
And only make $75,000?
What are they in? Elizabethan Poetry? Modern Dance? Hungarian Cabinet-making? English Cousine? Animal Husbandry?
Or are they five associate degrees from a local community college?
Good thing the hip-waders are on...
And I know you are all dying
January 26, 2007 - 21:06 ET by crsheddAnd I know you are all dying to hear my typology test results: (drumroll)
Upbeats.
Go figure.
crs...Say what?
January 26, 2007 - 21:13 ET by bigtimercrs...
Say what?
And it stays Upbeats when I i
January 26, 2007 - 21:23 ET by crsheddAnd it stays Upbeats when I include my view of myself--Independent, Moderate.
In case people don't notice (unsane), I am not against a lot of the things I write about, most often I am point out and disagree with EXTREMES such as the $400 million retirement package.
Green eyed monster, there, cr
January 26, 2007 - 21:28 ET by BlondeGreen eyed monster, there, crshedd.
Green eyed monster.
Too bad, so sad. You weren't as successful as you've fancied yourself to be, eh what?
Depends on what you call suce
January 26, 2007 - 21:40 ET by crsheddDepends on what you call sucessful. On this site it usually comes down to money.
Enterprisers: '...financially well-off (62% have household incomes of at least $50,000, compared with 40% nationwide).' (my emphasis)
Upbeats: 'Upbeats are among the wealthiest typology groups (39% have household incomes of $75,000 or more). (my emphasis)
And, yes blonde, I am in that 39%.
So what?It's the "at lea
January 26, 2007 - 21:43 ET by BlondeSo what?
It's the "at least" thing that trips you up, crshedd. (emphasis added on my part, just so you can't weasel out of anything.)
<edit>
BTW...whoopdie for you on your percentile there, crshedd. LOL.
And the 'or more' that trips
January 26, 2007 - 21:44 ET by crsheddAnd the 'or more' that trips you up.
Oh, laughing."Or more...
January 26, 2007 - 21:50 ET by BlondeOh, laughing.
"Or more...trips you up, Blonde".
Trolling, trolling, trolling....keep those doggies rolling....troll on.
Sheesh.
Ok, you got me, Blonde.If it
January 26, 2007 - 22:38 ET by crsheddOk, you got me, Blonde.
If it isn't the money that makes me 'not as sucessful as I fancied', what is it.
The 'troll' remarks aren't saying anything to back up what you said.
crshedd,What "trips you
January 26, 2007 - 22:49 ET by Blondecrshedd,
What "trips you up" is your self-proclaimed moral superiority. Which is really rather amusing.
You have blathered on all over this site about your numerous degrees, your professional accomplishments, etc., etc. Mister big shot public school administrator....or somesuch. Teacher of the masses (as you think you continue to do here...LOL).
Furthermore, you have also mentioned "the money". Quite recently as your last post. So.......
You wet your pants over the hyperly-paid golden parachute of an executive....with disdain. And...the green eyed goddess....envy. You just can't stand that, can you, my overly educated friend?
So choose. Which persona is your true self? Ultra-educated teacher? Or a capitalist entrepreneur? Your attempt to have it both ways is rather crude.
Money is money, honey. I make it too. So what?
My 'blather' was in response
January 26, 2007 - 23:05 ET by crsheddMy 'blather' was in response to others statements. I'm REALLY sorry I respond to what others say to or about me. My bad.
Thank you for calling me a big shot educator. I was good but never considered myself a big shot. I did my job, and I did it very well. I assume you do your job and I would like to think you do it very well, also.
Yes, I do view a retirement package of $400 million with disdain. I feel it is excessive. The CEO who was basically forced into retirement after a very poor job got $54 million. That is excessive for his job performance.
However, I am not against big retirements, just execessive ones.
I really apologize that I spent 15 years in education and then left to open my own business, then another one. But, you know, with my -as you put it- 'ultra education', I can do more than one thing. What a country!
What is my true self? Educator or capitalist? Can't have it both ways?The way you put it, I should not be allowed to leave one profession and move to another. But, guess what? I've even been toying with selling my two businesses and starting a new career! OMG! I'm interested in designing houses but really don't want to go back to school. Even with my degrees, I never liked going to school, and now I am getting too old to put up with the young punks in college.
pauvre petit chou.You are fre
January 26, 2007 - 23:16 ET by Blondepauvre petit chou.
You are free to spin it any way you choose.
Laughing.
How's this?Want some Freedom
January 26, 2007 - 23:28 ET by crsheddHow's this?
Want some Freedom Fries with that French, honey?
Thank you,Mr. Burger King win
January 26, 2007 - 23:35 ET by BlondeThank you,
Mr. Burger King window server. Nice job.
Yes, I'll take the "freedom fries".
You may continue to dish them up.
Merci beaucoups.
no es nada.
January 26, 2007 - 23:43 ET by crsheddno es nada.
OK all...Press #1 for English
January 26, 2007 - 23:52 ET by bigtimerOK all...
Press #1 for English....
bigtimer
January 26, 2007 - 23:56 ET by ww thumperbigtimer [ #1] " press"!!! v Being "Politcaly Correct" with ISLAM will distroy America......V
You're only a year or two awa
January 26, 2007 - 23:16 ET by NeoConfirmedYou're only a year or two away from Conservatism.
'Oh, the humanity!'
January 26, 2007 - 23:47 ET by crshedd'Oh, the humanity!'
crshedd, judge, jury, legally-empowered thief
January 26, 2007 - 23:48 ET by UnsaneWho appointed you the judge of what is and what is not excessive?
Lee Raymond actually was a damn good CEO that turned Exxon (later ExxonMobil) stock from a moribund performer to a high-flyer. Hell yes he deserved a cut of that from his success.
Do Warren Buffett and Bill Gates similarly offend you for their successes that dwarf even that of Mr. Raymond?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Professional school bullies
January 26, 2007 - 23:42 ET by UnsaneDon't you know that principals are nothing more than school bullies that get paid to be school bullies?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)