it's new year's eve now...
-
brianwelsch wrote: Personally, I have not lost any freedoms to do what i want, yet. When I do... "First They Came for the Jews" By Pastor Niemoller First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew. Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist. Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. -c
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
Chris, How loudly did you complain when the federal government came for the Branch Dividians in Waco? Conservatives have been complaining for decades about the lose of our traditional constitutional liberties as the left went about virtually rewriting the entire document. Most of us are deeply concerned about the current course of events. Bush's decisions are extremly dangerous, but I have yet to hear a rational alternative. If the U.N. prohibits us from controlling the situation internationally, and the constitution prohibits us from controlling the situation domestically, what are we left with? Aside from utter capitualtion what do we do? If you were president right now, what is the first thing you would do? "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
-
Thomas George wrote: there were major lapses in implementing existing law that caused Sep. 11 Actually, what caused September 11 was a bunch of religious fanatics who believe killing civilians advances their cause.
probably it should change "caused" to "allowed to happen, when these guys wanted to cause". anyway, that is what i meant the first time too. :-D My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Thomas George wrote: there were major lapses in implementing existing law that caused Sep. 11 Actually, what caused September 11 was a bunch of religious fanatics who believe killing civilians advances their cause.
My engineering (and Business Think) cap here says that the root cause of all this is religion it self. People need to belive more in themselves. It is way to easy to say that you have done somehting in the name of a God. Blow up 3000 people and say that you did it because YOU felt that they deserved it and suddenly it becomes much more difficult to get people to stand behind you and wave your flag. My problem with all organized religion is that it BREEDS fanatics.
Paul Watson wrote: "At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote: "Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
-
I'm not too certain that will be true in my country for very much longer. Amen. Did you hear about the guy in Oregon (or was it Washington) that got put in jail for making a joke in a bar about God creating a new "burning Bush"? (or something like that). Some truck driver overhead this guy, called the police, and now he's in jail for several years. Welcome back to the McCarthy era. And even worse, Bush's speeches are reminiscent of Hitler's regarding national security, the "invisible enemy", etc. Two more years, then maybe we can vote him out of office! Marc Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
Sensitivity and ethnic diversity means celebrating difference, not hiding from it. - Christian Graus
Every line of code is a liability - Taka MuraokaMarc Clifton wrote: Did you hear about the guy in Oregon (or was it Washington) that got put in jail for making a joke in a bar about God creating a new "burning Bush"? (or something like that). http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=16929[^] http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/06/burning.bush.ap/[^] ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
-
brianwelsch wrote: Personally, I have not lost any freedoms to do what i want, yet We all have, to some extent. Trouble is, the line has moved and you can't see it. The tigress is here :-D
Freedoms I have lost that I care about.... I cannot buy a six pack at the local grocery store on Sunday. I cannot keep most of my paycheck due to various taxes. I cannot drive as fast as I'm comfortable without risking a traffic violation I may not actually own land, but rather rent it from the government via property tax I can't buy a ferret in South Carolina, (but I can bring one in from elsewhere) I can not get a tattoo in SC, either. (I can drive an hour to NC and get one though) I cannot open up a casino in this state either, however I can play state run lottery.(not a problem but does piss me off) I can work where I want, buy want I want, live where I want, spend my free time however I choose, invest money or save it how I wish, vote on my representatives, travel freely, complain about the laws, what have I lost that really effects my daily living?? There are individual reports(richard humphries "burning bush"), but these are not the norm, and I don't really know the full story behind them anyway. BW "If you enjoy what you do, you'll never work another day in your life." - Confucius
-
It is a shame. I think even considering the lurking dangers, the administration is paranoid. Also, I do not still understand how North Korea (with a nuclear programme against a treaty with US, and having an untested, yet developed missile that can deliver it to US west coast) is a lesser threat than Iraq? Rumsfeld says that he is building missile shield for this. Does the shield discriminate between an Iraqi missile and N. Korean missile or what? The arguments don't fit in. I hope someone can clear my doubts. Bill O'rielly was saying on Fox that Saddam funds Hamas, and once Saddam is out, Hamas will no longer be there, and there will be a chance of peace in Middle East. Is it not what we call wishful thinking or living in fool's paradise? The Palestine problem was there even before Saddam became leader of Iraq. I believe Palestinians will keep finding new supporters. Is FOX news getting funded by the US govt. for putting out these speculations? My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
Also, I do not still understand how North Korea (with a nuclear programme against a treaty with US, and having an untested, yet developed missile that can deliver it to US west coast) is a lesser threat than Iraq? I see North Korea as less of a problem because of it's geography. Who is it going to attack? South Korea? Japan? China? Russia? Those are it's neighbors. North Korea would be committing suicide to attack China or Russia. If they attack South Korea or Japan, they'll also be in trouble because other countries will jump in to defend them. North Korea may spur its neighbors into a nuclear arms race, but only South Korea and Japan are without nukes. I don't like the idea of nuclear proliferation, but South Korea and Japan with nukes is better than Syria or Libya with nukes. (Although, North Korea is a very real danger when it comes to the possibility of them selling nuclear technology and/or complete nuclear weapons to other nations.) On the other hand, Iraq is in the Middle East. The Middle East is more unstable and possesses a large number of extremists. If Iraq gets nukes it's neighbors will also feel a need to get them (with good reason). We could be looking at a lot of nuclear-armed Middle Eastern countries if Iraq gets them. (Arguably Israel should've spurred a nuclear-arms race since it has had nukes for a long time. They do have a somewhat of an argument about why they should have them - specifically the number of times Arab countries have attacked them and the number of Arab countries which refuse to deal with them. Maybe Arab countries, despite their dislike of Israel, don't see forsee that Israel will use nukes in any situation except to defend itself - hence they have no need to develop them. ???) Concerning Iraq, the US has some UN resolutions that they can point to when asked to justify disarming Iraq. This isn't true of North Korea (even though they signed a mutual agreement). And this is even less true of Israel. Bill O'rielly was saying on Fox that Saddam funds Hamas, and once Saddam is out, Hamas will no longer be there, and there will be a chance of peace in Middle East. That doesn't seem very realistic. Sure, Saddam has paid money to the families of suicide bombers. But, Saddam is a very minor figure when it comes to the question of "What is keeping the Israel-Palestine conflict alive?" ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look i
-
Who is they? BW "If you enjoy what you do, you'll never work another day in your life." - Confucius
A is for Ashcroft who knows what you do B is for Bush who all this approved C is for Cheney who keeps it all hidden D is for Donald, Rumsfeld that is E is for Enron, who now runs the Army etc. -c
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
-
Also, I do not still understand how North Korea (with a nuclear programme against a treaty with US, and having an untested, yet developed missile that can deliver it to US west coast) is a lesser threat than Iraq? I see North Korea as less of a problem because of it's geography. Who is it going to attack? South Korea? Japan? China? Russia? Those are it's neighbors. North Korea would be committing suicide to attack China or Russia. If they attack South Korea or Japan, they'll also be in trouble because other countries will jump in to defend them. North Korea may spur its neighbors into a nuclear arms race, but only South Korea and Japan are without nukes. I don't like the idea of nuclear proliferation, but South Korea and Japan with nukes is better than Syria or Libya with nukes. (Although, North Korea is a very real danger when it comes to the possibility of them selling nuclear technology and/or complete nuclear weapons to other nations.) On the other hand, Iraq is in the Middle East. The Middle East is more unstable and possesses a large number of extremists. If Iraq gets nukes it's neighbors will also feel a need to get them (with good reason). We could be looking at a lot of nuclear-armed Middle Eastern countries if Iraq gets them. (Arguably Israel should've spurred a nuclear-arms race since it has had nukes for a long time. They do have a somewhat of an argument about why they should have them - specifically the number of times Arab countries have attacked them and the number of Arab countries which refuse to deal with them. Maybe Arab countries, despite their dislike of Israel, don't see forsee that Israel will use nukes in any situation except to defend itself - hence they have no need to develop them. ???) Concerning Iraq, the US has some UN resolutions that they can point to when asked to justify disarming Iraq. This isn't true of North Korea (even though they signed a mutual agreement). And this is even less true of Israel. Bill O'rielly was saying on Fox that Saddam funds Hamas, and once Saddam is out, Hamas will no longer be there, and there will be a chance of peace in Middle East. That doesn't seem very realistic. Sure, Saddam has paid money to the families of suicide bombers. But, Saddam is a very minor figure when it comes to the question of "What is keeping the Israel-Palestine conflict alive?" ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look i
N Korea will attack US west coast. That is the range of their new missile. ... and of course, S. Korea and Japan. My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Marc Clifton wrote: Did you hear about the guy in Oregon (or was it Washington) that got put in jail for making a joke in a bar about God creating a new "burning Bush"? (or something like that). http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=16929[^] http://www.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/12/06/burning.bush.ap/[^] ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look in the mirror and they're moving aircraft carriers into the Gulf region?" - The Onion
Yup. That guy. OK, so he's a nutcase. Still... I liked this line from another story: The police told me I had to be in the designated free-speech area. Marc Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
Sensitivity and ethnic diversity means celebrating difference, not hiding from it. - Christian Graus
Every line of code is a liability - Taka Muraoka -
To be fair, O'Rielly doesn't even pretend to be a journalist, and O'Rielly often make it clear that he is stating his opinion, rather than news; something that would be welcome on all News providers. Some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could have thought of them - George Orwell
but, now on all news channels, all news programs more opinions than news. Is there any program now, where I can get just news - like old times when I did not have to hear what this guy thinks? My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Marc Clifton wrote: And even worse, Bush's speeches are reminiscent of Hitler's regarding national security, the "invisible enemy", etc. Two more years, then maybe we can vote him out of office! I'm still not on that side of things. Bush has not gone nearly as far as Abraham Lincoln did during the Civil War to control critics of his administration (ever hear of Habeus Corpus? (sp?)). I'm still a Bush supporter even though I don't like many of the decisions he has been compelled to make. As I've said many times, if we are unable to eliminate the threat of middle eastern terrorism by direct military action, what choice does the government have but to become ever more security minded regardless of the constitution? What else is Bush supposed to do? Besides, after 50 years of trashing the constitution, those on the left have no room to complain about Bush's administration. "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
if we are unable to eliminate the threat of middle eastern terrorism by direct military action, what choice does the government have but to become ever more security minded regardless of the constitution? What else is Bush supposed to do? Not that this is Bush's doing, but how about putting a stop to all the money that goes to Israeli, stop supplying military equipment and aid to mid-east countries, and get out of the politics in the region? Let them fight their own damn wars. Marc Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
Sensitivity and ethnic diversity means celebrating difference, not hiding from it. - Christian Graus
Every line of code is a liability - Taka Muraoka -
Chris, How loudly did you complain when the federal government came for the Branch Dividians in Waco? Conservatives have been complaining for decades about the lose of our traditional constitutional liberties as the left went about virtually rewriting the entire document. Most of us are deeply concerned about the current course of events. Bush's decisions are extremly dangerous, but I have yet to hear a rational alternative. If the U.N. prohibits us from controlling the situation internationally, and the constitution prohibits us from controlling the situation domestically, what are we left with? Aside from utter capitualtion what do we do? If you were president right now, what is the first thing you would do? "Any clod can have the facts, but having opinions is an art." Charles McCabe, San Francisco Chronicle
Stan Shannon wrote: How loudly did you complain when the federal government came for the Branch Dividians in Waco? i didn't complain at all. i was 20. i was more concerned with getting through Physics III at the time. Stan Shannon wrote: Conservatives have been complaining for decades about the lose of our traditional constitutional liberties as the left went about virtually rewriting the entire document. sure, it's someone else's fault. how long has Bush been in office? has he fixed a single thing? no, he's raised the bar on how intrusive and unaccountable government can be. if he had a "D (TX)" next to his name, you'd be in a fucking frenzy. and until the saintly, all perfect, all knowing, all seeing, brilliant godlike right does something that doesn't include bringing back COINTELPRO, implementing a big-brother police state, illegally detaining its own citizens, and otherwise ignoring all the amedments except the precious 2nd, you should shut up about the evil "left". Stan Shannon wrote: what is the first thing you would do? * push for the un-doing of PATRIOT * get the pharma welfare out of the Homeland Security bill * get the fucker who put it there fired * stop the defense work-fare (Gulf II, missile defense) * quit trying to gut the EPA (because like it or not, there's more to life than oil and power company profits - some people actually like to go outside and breathe on the weekends) * tell the media companies that they cannot have indefinite extensions on copyrights, even if it means Disney loses control of Mickey Mouse * push for meaningful campaign finance reform. stop pretending that money = speech; it doesn't, only a lawyer would claim otherwise. * get the US out of the world police job. for real. should i go on?
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
-
My engineering (and Business Think) cap here says that the root cause of all this is religion it self. People need to belive more in themselves. It is way to easy to say that you have done somehting in the name of a God. Blow up 3000 people and say that you did it because YOU felt that they deserved it and suddenly it becomes much more difficult to get people to stand behind you and wave your flag. My problem with all organized religion is that it BREEDS fanatics.
Paul Watson wrote: "At the end of the day it is what you produce that counts, not how many doctorates you have on the wall."
George Carlin wrote: "Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things."
Ray Cassick wrote: My problem with all organized religion is that it BREEDS fanatics. True, but i think it has more to do with stresing independent thinking, when children are educated. Fanaticism has more to do with the values that get instilled in you in childhood. Understanding logic should be made the pre-requisite for learning religion.:-D. It is probably the change in the education system (promoting independent thinking), that helped stem the production of Christian fanatics that Europe had a few centuries ago. In the west, there is a fanaticism for wealth. :-D . Probably, caused all these scams and left a lot of people economically destroyed. In that sense, money has also become a religion. My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Yup. That guy. OK, so he's a nutcase. Still... I liked this line from another story: The police told me I had to be in the designated free-speech area. Marc Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
Sensitivity and ethnic diversity means celebrating difference, not hiding from it. - Christian Graus
Every line of code is a liability - Taka MuraokaMarc Clifton wrote: designated free-speech area where is that? My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
A is for Ashcroft who knows what you do B is for Bush who all this approved C is for Cheney who keeps it all hidden D is for Donald, Rumsfeld that is E is for Enron, who now runs the Army etc. -c
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
L is for Losinger, who creatively answers. :) BW "If you enjoy what you do, you'll never work another day in your life." - Confucius
-
Also, I do not still understand how North Korea (with a nuclear programme against a treaty with US, and having an untested, yet developed missile that can deliver it to US west coast) is a lesser threat than Iraq? I see North Korea as less of a problem because of it's geography. Who is it going to attack? South Korea? Japan? China? Russia? Those are it's neighbors. North Korea would be committing suicide to attack China or Russia. If they attack South Korea or Japan, they'll also be in trouble because other countries will jump in to defend them. North Korea may spur its neighbors into a nuclear arms race, but only South Korea and Japan are without nukes. I don't like the idea of nuclear proliferation, but South Korea and Japan with nukes is better than Syria or Libya with nukes. (Although, North Korea is a very real danger when it comes to the possibility of them selling nuclear technology and/or complete nuclear weapons to other nations.) On the other hand, Iraq is in the Middle East. The Middle East is more unstable and possesses a large number of extremists. If Iraq gets nukes it's neighbors will also feel a need to get them (with good reason). We could be looking at a lot of nuclear-armed Middle Eastern countries if Iraq gets them. (Arguably Israel should've spurred a nuclear-arms race since it has had nukes for a long time. They do have a somewhat of an argument about why they should have them - specifically the number of times Arab countries have attacked them and the number of Arab countries which refuse to deal with them. Maybe Arab countries, despite their dislike of Israel, don't see forsee that Israel will use nukes in any situation except to defend itself - hence they have no need to develop them. ???) Concerning Iraq, the US has some UN resolutions that they can point to when asked to justify disarming Iraq. This isn't true of North Korea (even though they signed a mutual agreement). And this is even less true of Israel. Bill O'rielly was saying on Fox that Saddam funds Hamas, and once Saddam is out, Hamas will no longer be there, and there will be a chance of peace in Middle East. That doesn't seem very realistic. Sure, Saddam has paid money to the families of suicide bombers. But, Saddam is a very minor figure when it comes to the question of "What is keeping the Israel-Palestine conflict alive?" ------------------------------------------ "Isn't it funny how people say they'll never grow up to be their parents, then one day they look i
Brit wrote: Arguably Israel should've spurred a nuclear-arms race since it has had nukes for a long time. They do have a somewhat of an argument about why they should have them - specifically the number of times Arab countries have attacked them and the number of Arab countries which refuse to deal with them. Maybe Arab countries, despite their dislike of Israel, don't see forsee that Israel will use nukes in any situation except to defend itself - hence they have no need to develop them. Israeli leadership just wants Israel to exist :-D. They understand that they are not helping themselves by bringing other Arab countries directly into the conflict, now that those countries are just giving back-door help. Arab countries want to sell oil to US and Europe more than they want to liberate Palestine :-D My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Freedoms I have lost that I care about.... I cannot buy a six pack at the local grocery store on Sunday. I cannot keep most of my paycheck due to various taxes. I cannot drive as fast as I'm comfortable without risking a traffic violation I may not actually own land, but rather rent it from the government via property tax I can't buy a ferret in South Carolina, (but I can bring one in from elsewhere) I can not get a tattoo in SC, either. (I can drive an hour to NC and get one though) I cannot open up a casino in this state either, however I can play state run lottery.(not a problem but does piss me off) I can work where I want, buy want I want, live where I want, spend my free time however I choose, invest money or save it how I wish, vote on my representatives, travel freely, complain about the laws, what have I lost that really effects my daily living?? There are individual reports(richard humphries "burning bush"), but these are not the norm, and I don't really know the full story behind them anyway. BW "If you enjoy what you do, you'll never work another day in your life." - Confucius
brianwelsch wrote: what have I lost that really effects my daily living?? you've lost the ability to be sure that the government will not search your house without a warrant. you've lost the ability to be sure that the government will not seize your property without a trial. (war on some drugs) you've lost the ability to be sure that the government will not monitor your internet access, library book use, purchases, phone calls (including those to your attorney), etc without you having actually broken a law. they only need to think that you might be involved in something. "guilty until we decide otherwise" just replaced "innocent until proven guilty". (USA PATRIOT) you've lost the ability to be sure that the govt won't vaccinate you against your will. and, if those vaccinations hurt you, you have no recourse (thanks to the Homeland Security Bill that was just passed). i'm not making any of this up, and if you like, i'll do the Googling to find the particular laws for you. -c
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
-
Stan Shannon wrote: How loudly did you complain when the federal government came for the Branch Dividians in Waco? i didn't complain at all. i was 20. i was more concerned with getting through Physics III at the time. Stan Shannon wrote: Conservatives have been complaining for decades about the lose of our traditional constitutional liberties as the left went about virtually rewriting the entire document. sure, it's someone else's fault. how long has Bush been in office? has he fixed a single thing? no, he's raised the bar on how intrusive and unaccountable government can be. if he had a "D (TX)" next to his name, you'd be in a fucking frenzy. and until the saintly, all perfect, all knowing, all seeing, brilliant godlike right does something that doesn't include bringing back COINTELPRO, implementing a big-brother police state, illegally detaining its own citizens, and otherwise ignoring all the amedments except the precious 2nd, you should shut up about the evil "left". Stan Shannon wrote: what is the first thing you would do? * push for the un-doing of PATRIOT * get the pharma welfare out of the Homeland Security bill * get the fucker who put it there fired * stop the defense work-fare (Gulf II, missile defense) * quit trying to gut the EPA (because like it or not, there's more to life than oil and power company profits - some people actually like to go outside and breathe on the weekends) * tell the media companies that they cannot have indefinite extensions on copyrights, even if it means Disney loses control of Mickey Mouse * push for meaningful campaign finance reform. stop pretending that money = speech; it doesn't, only a lawyer would claim otherwise. * get the US out of the world police job. for real. should i go on?
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
Pissed you off, did he? Some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could have thought of them - George Orwell
-
brianwelsch wrote: what have I lost that really effects my daily living?? you've lost the ability to be sure that the government will not search your house without a warrant. you've lost the ability to be sure that the government will not seize your property without a trial. (war on some drugs) you've lost the ability to be sure that the government will not monitor your internet access, library book use, purchases, phone calls (including those to your attorney), etc without you having actually broken a law. they only need to think that you might be involved in something. "guilty until we decide otherwise" just replaced "innocent until proven guilty". (USA PATRIOT) you've lost the ability to be sure that the govt won't vaccinate you against your will. and, if those vaccinations hurt you, you have no recourse (thanks to the Homeland Security Bill that was just passed). i'm not making any of this up, and if you like, i'll do the Googling to find the particular laws for you. -c
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
Chris Losinger wrote: i'm not making any of this up, and if you like, i'll do the Googling to find the particular laws for you. I know its not made up. I guess my whole point is, I am not concerned nor are many people like me, because an incredibly large percentage of the time 1 & 2 do not happen to joe schmoe regular citizen who is leading a law-abiding life. 3 really doesn't bother me. If Uncle Sam wants to know that I've searched on the Anarchist Cookbook, Aerosmith, and World Cup Soccer, I don't care. Just like I really wouldn't care if you knew what I bought at the grocery store. Its all uninteresting and useless information when it comes to applying it to my life. Re: #4, AFAIK, there are waivers for any vaccination, they just don't advertise them. the right to sue I believe was ony taken away for the one vaccination given by a specific company, and that was only for lawsuits dealing with autism(sp?) I might wrong here, but thats my understanding. I understand where you are coming from. That we should make a stand at each injustice to help maintain/improve our level of freedom, and I'm becoming more likely to make an issue over things that bother me that don't immediately effect my life (on a normal day), but at the end of the day its hard to have the energy to fight for things that I don't really see. For the most part Uncle Sam keeps me fat and happy. BW "If you enjoy what you do, you'll never work another day in your life." - Confucius
-
brianwelsch wrote: what have I lost that really effects my daily living?? you've lost the ability to be sure that the government will not search your house without a warrant. you've lost the ability to be sure that the government will not seize your property without a trial. (war on some drugs) you've lost the ability to be sure that the government will not monitor your internet access, library book use, purchases, phone calls (including those to your attorney), etc without you having actually broken a law. they only need to think that you might be involved in something. "guilty until we decide otherwise" just replaced "innocent until proven guilty". (USA PATRIOT) you've lost the ability to be sure that the govt won't vaccinate you against your will. and, if those vaccinations hurt you, you have no recourse (thanks to the Homeland Security Bill that was just passed). i'm not making any of this up, and if you like, i'll do the Googling to find the particular laws for you. -c
I'm not the droid you're looking for.
I'd have to agree. It bothered Bob Barr so much that he now works for the ACLU... But, I don't blame it so much on conservatives (note, not the same as Republican in most cases) as I do on the same panicy wimps that bought us political correctness. Both major parties focus way too much on promoting their own future, at our expense. Some ideas are so stupid that only an intellectual could have thought of them - George Orwell