Base Closings Hidden Problems

[archangel]

His website says
M - F: 6-9 pm Pacific
9-Midnight Eastern
"Saturday Night America"
5-8 pm Pacific
8-11 Eastern
I'll see if a Bangor station carries the program Pickings are pretty slim up here. I'm going to look for him and that good-looking Sean fellow. More than that and I might get the sort of brain damage that is all around me.

Rusty Humphries moved from Reno,Nevada to Seattle Washington....He is a pretty good Radio Show Host.....You might also try Michael Savage...He hits a lot harder than Rusty though!

www.michaelsavage.com web site!

 

[dmp]

His website says
M - F: 6-9 pm Pacific
9-Midnight Eastern
"Saturday Night America"
5-8 pm Pacific
8-11 Eastern
I'll see if a Bangor station carries the program Pickings are pretty slim up here. I'm going to look for him and that good-looking Sean fellow. More than that and I might get the sort of brain damage that is all around me.

If you are on broadband, I'll pay the $6? or whatever it is to get you a membership w/ Rusty - so you can stream the audio for a month!

 

[mrsx]

If you are on broadband, I'll pay the $6? or whatever it is to get you a membership w/ Rusty - so you can stream the audio for a month!

I'm afraid we are dial-up. Don't even have cable in my "suburb" of Bangor. I am really touched that you would spend the $6 bucks - I mean that is one of the few, perhaps the only time I have felt that someone wanted to convert me or convince me as opposed to defeat me in this cyber home for the strange. I thank you for the thought. There is one place where I do have access to a computer with broadband. They may even have this guy. I'll check it out when I'm downtown. Thanks again, you made my evening (you rogue, you!)

 

[mrsx]

Oh a week huh? Ok let's start the countdown. Go drink your koolaid!

I am going to be sure to watch "Insanity and Combs" as my friend calls it and I will try to find his radio show, the Rustmeister too, if I can. Isn't the koolaid reference to Jim Jones and his Guyana community? I thought he was one of your guys! Or perhaps you reference Ken Kesey and the Pranksters? They are one with you in spirit even if their GPS doesn't let them get to the polls. Which flavor is your personal favorite?

 

[mrsx]

Wade - always figured you for a woman!

I explained my asking why you thought I was Wayne or Wade or whoever your imaginary friend is. I regret adding to your already profound confusion. I'm not going to go on denyng your strange and to my eyes unfounded obsession with this former acquaintance. It ain't me.

I did watch Sean Hannity tonight and it caused me to think that the reason for our protracted dialogue of the deaf is sadder and more profound than just a different perspective on current events. We are citizens of different countries. I belong to the United States of Canada and you are a proud member of Jesusland. The national unity that was so strong at the end of WWII is tearing apart in a way that it hasn't since the Civil War. But unlike that long-ago division, we are in each other's faces and on each other's TV screens day in and day out. We think we are one family, that we understand each other. But we don't.

I say without condescension that we are today's quebecquois looking at rural French speakers in Maine or a citizen from Eire meeting his long-lost cousin from Boston. We recognize you - we used to have a common value system and a common frame of reference. But a gulf has opened between us. You live in one America, we in another. We have moved on. You still believe in a Divine Saviour who rose from the dead, the log cabin, the pioneer spirit, an America where any poor kid can rise to be president, an America whose spirit and liberty and standard of living are the envy of the world and a model for the less fortunate nations. Ronald Reagan and Frank Capra, Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle -- it's a world of certainties, of traditional values and social roles. I'm old enough to remember when the mailman came twice a day and cream rose to the top of milk bottles. I think I know where you are coming from.

But once we have left that world, we can't go back again. We accept evolution, relativity in science, relativity in ethics. We believe that some form of the modern welfare state is a necessary social condition for human dignity in a world of globalized technology. We revere our past but we acknowlege our faults. Whatever God there may or may not be, He isn't pulling the strings of providential design for America, His own very special land. We're just another world citizen, and a rather provincial and self-righteous one at that.

If we all recongnized that Red America and Blue America are different from each other the way Australia and Britain are different from each other, we'd respect each other more and we'd argue less. It's because we unconsciously assume that we are one people still that we are so hurt and so bitter as we judge each other. We expect more from family than neighbors. But we aren't family any more. We Blues are like the kids who come home from college and find Ma and Pa still living a life that is sweet and sincere but outmoded and cannot work for us now that we've seen something of the wide world. And it pissess us off to be treated like kids by people who we now see clearly don't get it.

My guess is that you will see the hurt in the responses to this post. There will be an immediate reaction of "Gotcha!" some name calling, a little childish twisting of what I have written in a way that you can tell seems unbeatably clever to the one who made it up. Then I'll be dismissed as crazy, as proof that citizens who disagree with you are inferior to you in wit and vision. You'll think you've solved the problem, burned the witch. It has to be that way, I'd guess; but then, if I had to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand.

 

[Annie]

I explained my asking why you thought I was Wayne or Wade or whoever your imaginary friend is. I regret adding to your already profound confusion. I'm not going to go on denyng your strange and to my eyes unfounded obsession with this former acquaintance. It ain't me.

I did watch Sean Hannity tonight and it caused me to think that the reason for our protracted dialogue of the deaf is sadder and more profound than just a different perspective on current events. We are citizens of different countries. I belong to the United States of Canada and you are a proud member of Jesusland. The national unity that was so strong at the end of WWII is tearing apart in a way that it hasn't since the Civil War. But unlike that long-ago division, we are in each other's faces and on each other's TV screens day in and day out. We think we are one family, that we understand each other. But we don't.

I say without condescension that we are today's quebecquois looking at rural French speakers in Maine or a citizen from Eire meeting his long-lost cousin from Boston. We recognize you - we used to have a common value system and a common frame of reference. But a gulf has opened between us. You live in one America, we in another. We have moved on. You still believe in a Divine Saviour who rose from the dead, the log cabin, the pioneer spirit, an America where any poor kid can rise to be president, an America whose spirit and liberty and standard of living are the envy of the world and a model for the less fortunate nations. Ronald Reagan and Frank Capra, Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle -- it's a world of certainties, of traditional values and social roles. I'm old enough to remember when the mailman came twice a day and cream rose to the top of milk bottles. I think I know where you are coming from.

But once we have left that world, we can't go back again. We accept evolution, relativity in science, relativity in ethics. We believe that some form of the modern welfare state is a necessary social condition for human dignity in a world of globalized technology. We revere our past but we acknowlege our faults. Whatever God there may or may not be, He isn't pulling the strings of providential design for America, His own very special land. We're just another world citizen, and a rather provincial and self-righteous one at that.

If we all recongnized that Red America and Blue America are different from each other the way Australia and Britain are different from each other, we'd respect each other more and we'd argue less. It's because we unconsciously assume that we are one people still that we are so hurt and so bitter as we judge each other. We expect more from family than neighbors. But we aren't family any more. We Blues are like the kids who come home from college and find Ma and Pa still living a life that is sweet and sincere but outmoded and cannot work for us now that we've seen something of the wide world. And it pissess us off to be treated like kids by people who we now see clearly don't get it.

My guess is that you will see the hurt in the responses to this post. There will be an immediate reaction of "Gotcha!" some name calling, a little childish twisting of what I have written in a way that you can tell seems unbeatably clever to the one who made it up. Then I'll be dismissed as crazy, as proof that citizens who disagree with you are inferior to you in wit and vision. You'll think you've solved the problem, burned the witch. It has to be that way, I'd guess; but then, if I had to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand.

Ummm, you are arguing for a divided America? Center V coasts?

 

[freeandfun1]

re-read your posts and then talk about childishness, name calling, etc. YOU are the POT calling the kettle BLACK. Grow up you swarmy little twit! (there, I gave you what you wanted!)

You're

 

[NATO AIR]

Wade- USMB whipping boy

Dude, do you have any pride left?

Go get a girlfriend, or a job, or a hobby.

Getting reamed by a dozen of the smartest, wittiest posters on USMB is not what one would consider a healthy or fun internet activity.

I mean.... damn. Hang it up, throw in the towel.

Oh and... quit hijacking my threads!

 

[mrsx]

Ummm, you are arguing for a divided America? Center V coasts?

Not arguing for just commenting on the reality of.

 

[mrsx]

Wade- USMB whipping boy

Dude, do you have any pride left?

Go get a girlfriend, or a job, or a hobby.

Getting reamed by a dozen of the smartest, wittiest posters on USMB is not what one would consider a healthy or fun internet activity.

I mean.... damn. Hang it up, throw in the towel.

Oh and... quit hijacking my threads!

Stop shouting and take off that ridiculous tin foil hat or you are going back to the time out room

 

[mrsx]

re-read your posts and then talk about childishness, name calling, etc. YOU are the POT calling the kettle BLACK. Grow up you swarmy little twit! (there, I gave you what you wanted!)

You're

Sonny, even if I wanted it, you couldn't give it to me. Send back your Inzyte supply for a refund - it ain't workin'

 

[CSM]

I suppose from mrsx would do for the rest of the country what folks with his/her opinion have done for Maine...highest taxes with lowest income and nothing to show for it except their "superior" intellect!

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Wade. Why do you assert that moving toward socialim is somehow moving to something better, something more evolved? It's just another name for oppression. It appeals to the basest emotion of envy in people. It's low and hate-filled. Move toward the light.

 

[mrsx]

Wade. Why do you assert that moving toward socialim is somehow moving to something better, something more evolved? It's just another name for oppression. It appeals to the basest emotion of envy in people. It's low and hate-filled. Move toward the light.

Good to be back! Good to be back! I can't convince you I am not this Wade feller just like you can't convince me you ain't Al Gore, so I'm just going to disregard it as I do some of your other idiosyncrasies (drooling, Asperger's Syndrome, fascination with war toys) and procede to the question you asked.

Socialism as I think you mean it, isn't a specific policy its a tendency on a spectrum whose other tendency is individualism. There isn't a single right answer to how much government should be involved in the economy or the lives of individuals. The emergency of WWII, for example, caused a giant increase in the kind of controls that people think of as socialism. When the crisis passed, we changed them. Even Libertarians conceed that we need some form of government (defense, roads etc.); nobody thinks all-government all-the-time is worth considering. So the question really is: what is the best role for government in various sectors of the economy at this time?

The Bush administration - ideologically commited to free trade - has just announced limitations on the import of Chinese textiles. Does this make them Socialists or hypocrites? No. In the real world, politicians have to make constant adjustments in policies as cost-benefit ratios change with events. Of course, this is a messy and imperfect business - especially in a democracy.

Day to day policy has to be guided toward some permanent set of values. In America we have spelled out those values with a clarity and precision unmatched in history: Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The discussion comes from what those words mean to us and how various policies work to advance the goals. The argument over life (right to) is particularly bitter right now but I will pass over the issue as I think your fear of "socialism" comes from disagreements over the other two terms.

The neocon view seems to be that the pursuit of happiness requires liberty as a precondition and that liberty is simply the absence of coercion. Others don't see it quite that way: "The man who is guided by reason is better off in society, where he is guided by a general system of law, than in solitude where he is independent." (Benny Spinoza) Can a person be free if s/he hasn't enough to eat? Can't read? Is terrified of losing the health insurance that is keeping him/her alive? There is no easy answer to this issue. Quite apart from our ethical obligation to the less fortunate, events like the French and Russian revolutions show that FTP (f*** the poor) approaches to government policy eventually distroy the democracy on which our liberty depends and, ultimately, bring the house down on all our heads.

I don't know if Wade agrees with this. You ask him - he's your imaginary friend.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Good to be back! Good to be back! I can't convince you I am not this Wade feller just like you can't convince me you ain't Al Gore, so I'm just going to disregard it as I do some of your other idiosyncrasies (drooling, Asperger's Syndrome, fascination with war toys) and procede to the question you asked.

Socialism as I think you mean it, isn't a specific policy its a tendency on a spectrum whose other tendency is individualism. There isn't a single right answer to how much government should be involved in the economy or the lives of individuals. The emergency of WWII, for example, caused a giant increase in the kind of controls that people think of as socialism. When the crisis passed, we changed them. Even Libertarians conceed that we need some form of government (defense, roads etc.); nobody thinks all-government all-the-time is worth considering. So the question really is: what is the best role for government in various sectors of the economy at this time?

The Bush administration - ideologically commited to free trade - has just announced limitations on the import of Chinese textiles. Does this make them Socialists or hypocrites? No. In the real world, politicians have to make constant adjustments in policies as cost-benefit ratios change with events. Of course, this is a messy and imperfect business - especially in a democracy.

Day to day policy has to be guided toward some permanent set of values. In America we have spelled out those values with a clarity and precision unmatched in history: Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The discussion comes from what those words mean to us and how various policies work to advance the goals. The argument over life (right to) is particularly bitter right now but I will pass over the issue as I think your fear of "socialism" comes from disagreements over the other two terms.

The neocon view seems to be that the pursuit of happiness requires liberty as a precondition and that liberty is simply the absence of coercion. Others don't see it quite that way: "The man who is guided by reason is better off in society, where he is guided by a general system of law, than in solitude where he is independent." (Benny Spinoza) Can a person be free if s/he hasn't enough to eat? Can't read? Is terrified of losing the health insurance that is keeping him/her alive? There is no easy answer to this issue. Quite apart from our ethical obligation to the less fortunate, events like the French and Russian revolutions show that FTP (f*** the poor) approaches to government policy eventually distroy the democracy on which our liberty depends and, ultimately, bring the house down on all our heads.

I don't know if Wade agrees with this. You ask him - he's your imaginary friend.

Why are your posts so belabored? There was not enough content to justify a post of this size.

Earlier you made sharp distinction between red staters and bluestaters, quipping that the blue were moving on to something better. We all know that ""better" you libs desire is "socialism", tyranny by a prettier name. I ask you to defend your view and you come back with definitions, and ineffective witticisms, off characterizations and smarm. But in the end it seems you agree with me. "FTP (f*** the poor) approaches to government policy eventually distroy the democracy on which our liberty depends and, ultimately, bring the house down on all our heads."

Why are you so wishy washy? Grow a nut please, lady from Canada.

 

[mrsx]

Why are your posts so belabored? There was not enough content to justify a post of this size.

Earlier you made sharp distinction between red staters and bluestaters, quipping that the blue were moving on to something better. We all know that ""better" you libs desire is "socialism", tyranny by a prettier name. I ask you to defend your view and you come back with definitions, and ineffective witticisms, off characterizations and smarm. But in the end it seems you agree with me. "FTP (f*** the poor) approaches to government policy eventually distroy the democracy on which our liberty depends and, ultimately, bring the house down on all our heads."

Why are you so wishy washy? Grow a nut please, lady from Canada.

OK, I'll try to dumb it down for you slow readers. Better does not mean Socialism, it means "better." Simply restating your fatuous syllogism does nothing to validate it. Sorry for getting you tangled up in "ideas." BTW, isn't the interstate highway system socialism? Please stay off it.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

OK, I'll try to dumb it down for you slow readers. Better does not mean Socialism, it means "better." Simply restating your fatuous syllogism does nothing to validate it. Sorry for getting you tangled up in "ideas." BTW, isn't the interstate highway system socialism? Please stay off it.

Ahh yes. Condescension, how charming. For dems, better IS socialism, for most canadians too.

Your little reducto ad absurdum about the highway system is laughable. Just because I'm not a socialist does not mean I don't believe in government at all. Some things should be done as a collective. I concede that.

Better is better? At least I use syllogisms. you use circular logic, or words to define themselves. That's ignorant.

 

[mrsx]

Your little reducto ad absurdum about the highway system is laughable. Just because I'm not a socialist does not mean I don't believe in government at all. Some things should be done as a collective. I concede that. .

Great! We may have the basis for an exchange of ideas here. What things should be done as a collective and how do we make the judgement?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Great! We may have the basis for an exchange of ideas here. What things should be done as a collective and how do we make the judgement?

You go first!

You're part of the blue state elite headed in the enlightened direction. Give us the full extent of your enlightened vision.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

No ideas, No leadership, No class. Damn, it's true.