Scared to look up my mutual funds

[Tobias]

Originally Posted by Bernie

I feel let down by the politicians, those richer than me that cheated others less fortunate out of money, and the corporate scoundrels that found ways to swindle money out of everything they could. Let me explain why.

You could start by explaining why the predominant sentiment here seems to be that most evil people are rich and powerful, and take advantage of the weak and helpless? I mean, is it more palatable when a scoundrel is poor? What about all the swindlers that go door to door and cheat little old ladies out of their life savings? And what about poor criminals who play havoc on the richer by taking their lives as they steal a little of their wealth?

In my opinion class warfare is not going to get us anywhere.

[Tobias]

Are Democrats more likely to ride bicycles than Republicans? Seriously, I’m trying to understand why there is so much anger, bitterness, and resentment towards W and Republicans here.

Assuming you are so miserable that you can’t see anything whatsoever right with our US of A, don’t some of you get a little tired of blaming W for everything that is wrong? In your book, is he so powerful that he can devastate an entire nation by himself?

Maybe liberal Democrats are simply an angry bunch, as illustrated by Jesse Jackson’s latest comments about 0bama.

[BoulderGeek]

Originally Posted by Tobias

Are Democrats more likely to ride bicycles than Republicans? Seriously, I’m trying to understand why there is so much anger, bitterness, and resentment towards W and Republicans here.

Assuming you are so miserable that you can’t see anything whatsoever right with our US of A, don’t some of you get a little tired of blaming W for everything that is wrong? In your book, is he so powerful that he can devastate an entire nation by himself?

Maybe liberal Democrats are simply an angry bunch, as illustrated by Jesse Jackson’s latest comments about 0bama.

For me, it has to do with the willful theft of the Office of the President through extremely dishonorable and dubious means. Then, using illicit power to craft a predetermined unilateral military action against a sovereign nation, while lying about it to the people and the government.

Then, to include the friends and cronies of the usurping political cabal now in power, funneling billions to friends and former colleagues of those who now send troops to die and be maimed, just so Bush, Cheney and Company could pay back the hidden costs of buying the Presidency.

No, W isn't that smart nor powerful. He's an easy mark and a buffoon. Cheney and Rove put W out front, to look like Alfred E. Neuman and take the wrath of a fscked-over populous, while Cheney, Rove, etc al continued to rape the national resources for their own PNAC agenda.

The entrenched group of businesspeople who backed and funded these asshats certainly are powerful enough to put this in motion and siphon the benefits, when taken en masse.

W is a sock puppet. But, that doesn't mean that our government and military resources haven't been overtaken by extremists, opportunists and liars.

[sloji]

Wealth is a severe form of poverty but unrecognized...if you can understand why then you are free to go your own way.

[Ray]

Originally Posted by Tobias

Are Democrats more likely to ride bicycles than Republicans? Seriously, I’m trying to understand why there is so much anger, bitterness, and resentment towards W and Republicans here.

Assuming you are so miserable that you can’t see anything whatsoever right with our US of A, don’t some of you get a little tired of blaming W for everything that is wrong? In your book, is he so powerful that he can devastate an entire nation by himself?

The first question is an interesting one. In terms of the "sport" of bicycling, I have no idea what the demographics or politics are. Seems like I've met folks from all over the economic and political spectrum on club rides, but we don't talk about that stuff much, so I don't really know. In terms of people riding bicycles for transportation (where bicycles become USEful), at least those who have a choice about it, I'd be willing to bet a good buck that Democrats ARE more likely to be doing that than Republicans. I could be wrong, I'm clearly biased and making all sorts of assumptions there and its not based on anything but a hunch, and I'd love to find out I am wrong. But I bet I'm not.

As for the second point, I can only speak for myself. I'm not miserable and MY life is great by any measure. I don't think the USA is a terrible place at all - I think its a great country due primarily to the incredible foresite of our revolutionary founding fathers who envisioned and set up a system of freedoms and checks and balances that have resulted in the greatest form of self-government the world has ever seen. We're also STILL capable of greater change and adaptability than probably any other nation on earth, which can only be seen as a good thing. Where else could we go from being a place where black people were routinely lynched in the south in my youth to being on the cusp of very possibly electing one PRESIDENT in my middle age!?!?!? The rate of social change in this country remains extraordinary and probably unique and that's ALL good imho.

But I also feel like we're in the process of squandering much of what makes us great in the name of continued material comfort that is a) shortsighted and not sustainable, and b) wrong in terms of creating suffering for many people around the world who've been pulled into our economic vortex against their will. I'm not blind to the fact that our economic vortex has also created great wealth elsewhere in the world, and some of that even trickles down to the common folk as well, but too much does not. Bottom line, when such a small percentage of the world's population is using such a huge percentage of the world's resources for our own comfort, something is BADLY wrong. And we're fouling our planet in the process, possibly irretreivably, possibly not.

I don't give W enough credit to blame him for much of what I see as wrong with this country - he's just the best symbol we've got and the Alfred E Newman explanation couldn't be better. He even frickin' LOOKS like him when he smirks, which is often. It is our population that I believe has gotten short-sited and stupid in just enough numbers to screw up the last couple of elections and I suspect will probably elect someone I consider the right guy this time, but for all the wrong reasons (the Barak'ster is NOT going to bring gas prices down!). But the elections are just symptomatic - its our lifestyles and insatiable desire for more more more that's put us here. All of this makes me an elitist and a snob I'm sure, but i can get away with it because I'm not running for anything!

BTW, I'm not under any illusions about human nature. If we weren't doing what we're doing to the rest of the world, someone else would be doing it to us. And probably will be soon. I think we're a fat, dumb, and happy empire but we see the writing on the wall and we're starting to panic and its showing. We're probably gonna come tumbling down like all the rest have and its not gonna be fun or pretty and I fear for my kids or grandkids or whoever, and maybe even myself, but I'm old enough that I'm kind of a secondary concern.

I'm sort of like George Carlin without near as good a sense of humor - I don't have much faith in mankind. I like people individually a lot and see more good in people than bad. Individually, I love us. But collectively, I don't think we're worth a warm bucket of piss (one of the words, inexplicably, you can't say on TV). We're like a lot of open racists I met in the 60s - some of the nicest people you'd ever want to meet if you came upon them in the grocery store or at a church social and you happened to be white (and not obviously Jewish). But if you get a bunch of them together and let 'em get their hoods on and start talking about losing what is RIGHTFULLY THEIRS, look out brother.

Oh, and I don't blame the rich. We have undue influence (I count anyone who's middle class or above in the USA as rich, and damn near anyone who hangs out on the Serotta board qualifies!), like we always have, but poor and middle class folks are every bit as dumb, short-sighted, and evil. But we're really all a good bunch of folks if you meet us one on one. I've met a lot of us and like us!

Count me as miserable and angry if you want. I don't feel that way. I'll cop to feeling pretty bummed and pessimistic about the state of things, but personally, things couldn't be better. And I appreciate that EVERY day. One of the ironies that becomes possible with age and perspective.

BTW, as always, sorry for the rant. But you can't just toss miserable and angry at people and not expect a response, Tobias. I could call you folks reactionaries with rose-colored glasses, but I don't believe it and it wouldn't be productive

-Ray

[Climb01742]

one of the lamest "arguments" put forth by many republicans is... if you criticize america, you must not dig america or be proud to be an american. what complete BS. being proud and being blind are two very different things. i love my daughter, too... would she grow up better if i never corrected or guided her behavior? love sometimes means saying "you're wrong".

and while W isn't solely responsible for the fix america finds itself in, he certainly has done more than his fair share to drive our national bus into the ditch. but gutless democratic politicians certainly share some of the blame, too... see yesterday's vote on wire-tapping.

[Spinner]

Originally Posted by Climb01742

one of the lamest "arguments" put forth by many republicans is... if you criticize america, you must not dig america or be proud to be an american. what complete BS. being proud and being blind are two very different things. i love my daughter, too... would she grow up better if i never corrected or guided her behavior? love sometimes means saying "you're wrong".

and while W isn't solely responsible for the fix america finds itself in, he certainly has done more than his fair share to drive our national bus into the ditch. but gutless democratic politicians certainly share some of the blame, too... see yesterday's vote on wire-tapping.

the republicans have done their best to criticize the presumptive democratic presidential nominee's wife (this crazy system will not allow me to enter her name, go figure) for her comment about "for the first time" having pride in her country.

well, i have been a registered voter, taxpayer and law-abiding citizen for decades and i can tell you that i have not always been proud of the actions of our country, especially during the last 8 years. this doesn't mean that i won't continue to be a good citizen (vote, pay taxes, abide by the laws).

am i a bad person too?

[Tobias]

Ray, your comment below reflects my feelings about PCs and the internet.

Originally Posted by Ray

But if you get a bunch of them together and let 'em get their hoods on and start talking about losing what is RIGHTFULLY THEIRS, look out brother.

I’m convinced we have too many whacked people with strange and crazy conspiracy theories that find each other on the internet and work themselves into an illogical frenzy. In my opinion these wackos are either extremist or weak-minded individuals who think repeating something enough times will make it so.

Basically I just get irritated at the continuous one-sided negative about W. If your life is as good as you mention (and mine is too), then he must be doing “something” right for many of us, right? Does anyone here think that “any” US President can share with us “all” information about economics or national security? In that context how can we possibly know the underlying reason for inexplicable decisions or actions meant to prevent panic or avert future disasters? For instance, do you think many Americans knew at the time how close they came to extinction during the Kennedy presidency? Or was it only understood many years later when information was declassified?

IMHO those “who see only what they want to see and disregard the rest” are fanatics. How can anyone maintain any sense of credibility when their views are excessively one-sided?

BTW Ray, I don’t consider myself a Republican. You may, I don’t. I consider myself an independent person; not just an independent in politics. The fact that I don’t like 0bama for president or don’t think that Bama-nomics are in the best interest of our nation doesn’t make me a Republican. Additionally, the fact that I’m questioning W bashing doesn’t mean I like the guy. I don’t.

[EXTREME5]

IMHO, No matter what chair you are sitting in; there is not a comfortable seat in the house.

[Ray]

Originally Posted by Tobias

Ray, your comment ...reflects my feelings about PCs and the internet. I’m convinced we have too many whacked people with strange and crazy conspiracy theories that find each other on the internet and work themselves into an illogical frenzy. In my opinion these wackos are either extremist or weak-minded individuals who think repeating something enough times will make it so.

Basically I just get irritated at the continuous one-sided negative about W. If your life is as good as you mention (and mine is too), then he must be doing “something” right for many of us, right?

I pretty much agree with you about the internet. The ability to link people with common interests is a great thing, but it is also, like any medium, a double edged sword. Just like it can link people with common hobbies like cycling or (in a past life) the Grateful Dead, it can also link people with some pretty extreme or fringe ideas. The "real world" tends not to give these people too much credibility or support so their extreme or fringe ideas don't get much traction, but when they find a couple hundred like minded souls from around the world who support and lend credence to their ideas, things can get wacky and downright dangerous pretty quickly. I think the whole Oklahoma City bombing was facilitated by the early days of the net and the Islamic terrorists use it too. But ultimately, its just paper - it doesn't create good or evil - it just facilitates both, and everything in between.

Regarding W, I don't rate the quality of a politician by my economic circumstances. I've been fine my whole adult life, whether under Reagan, Clinton, or either Bush. I personally think that our national priorities, as reflected by Bush and his cronies (but not caused by them - I agree that politicians are not at the root of the problem generally - we get what we ask for) are a mess right now. I think they're all about short term propping up of a standard of living that's not sustainable. Any politician who tries improving things in the long term and sacrifices ANYthing in the near term will be shortly unemployed - Carter being a good example. He was, by all accounts, a relatively poor politician. But if we'd started toward energy independence when he was pushing us to, instead of taking the easy way out with another few years of "morning in America", we'd be in better shape today. We wanted to feel good about ourselves and Reagan let us do that, but I think we'd have been better off taking our medicine then instead of dealing with an energy crisis now. Maybe its inevitable that we wait until we have a crisis to deal with a problem, but i still think that's remarkably stupid and I reserve the right to criticize it.

I disagree with Bush on most things, but think he's been pretty good on a few things - immigration, free trade, AIDs in Africa. But I think his social policies, economic policies, and foreign policy in general have been worse than terrible. A huge percentage of the country seems to agree now. I wish they'd felt that way in 2004. Understand, I don't for a minute think he CAUSED most of our problems, but he's played what I see as a very destructive role. We asked him to do it, so its ultimately our fault, but that doesn't let him off the hook either. You can't fire the whole team, so you fire the manager, eh?

-Ray

[RPS]

Originally Posted by Ray

Any politician who tries improving things in the long term and sacrifices ANYthing in the near term will be shortly unemployed - Carter being a good example. He was, by all accounts, a relatively poor politician. But if we'd started toward energy independence when he was pushing us to, instead of taking the easy way out with another few years of "morning in America", we'd be in better shape today.

Engineers like Carter can be very good problem solvers. Unfortunately he lacked other skills to sell his solutions.

Talking of Carter, I noticed some are discussing bringing back the 55 MPH national speed limit as a means to reduce our dependency on foreign oil; hence help the economy. It’s interesting because most believe it was Carter’s doing, but records show it was Nixon. I guess I was too young at the time to care whose idea it was.

BTW, I’d guess the inverse of your assessment of Carter must also exist. Being a good politician does not make one a good leader or a good long-term problem solver.

[Ray]

Originally Posted by RPS

Engineers like Carter can be very good problem solvers. Unfortunately he lacked other skills to sell his solutions.

Talking of Carter, I noticed some are discussing bringing back the 55 MPH national speed limit as a means to reduce our dependency on foreign oil; hence help the economy. It’s interesting because most believe it was Carter’s doing, but records show it was Nixon. I guess I was too young at the time to care whose idea it was.

BTW, I’d guess the inverse of your assessment of Carter must also exist. Being a good politician does not make one a good leader or a good long-term problem solver.

Yeah, I actually remember the 55mph speed limit and remember that it was Nixon, but I don't remember the specific precipitating event, if there was one.

I'd agree that being a good politician doesn't make one a good leader or long term problem solver. Nor are "leader" and "long term problem solver" necessarily the same. Bush is a damn good politician and arguably a strong leader - he got a lot of his agenda through. I'd argue that he's a terrible long term problem solver, but the story isn't written on that one yet. I hope I have to eat my words in 20 years. I've certainly eaten SOME of my words about Reagan. He was a very effective leader and was very good, in retrospect, on some issues. And, to my perspective, pretty terrible on others. I'd say Clinton was a great politician, a very good long term problem solver, but not much of a leader - hence, he didn't get a lot of his long-term solutions through and settled for playing small ball for most of his terms. Not being able to keep his unit in his pants didn't help. I have high hopes for Omaba, if he gets elected, but I also think that some of the problems we're facing now are likely to result in a succession of one-term presidents unless someone emerges a Rooseveltian leader who can help us find our way through the morass and convince us of a difficult but necessary course of action. Tough times sometimes bring out the best in presidents. I guess we'll see.

-Ray

[Spinner]

Originally Posted by Ray

Yeah, I actually remember the 55mph speed limit and remember that it was Nixon, but I don't remember the specific precipitating event, if there was one.

-Ray

the 55 speed limit happened in 1973 as a result of an oil embargo triggered by opec in response to the yom kippur war.

i remember the situation well. i decided to drive 55 before it became the official limit. my only real problem with the 55 limit was related to all of the resources used across the country to replace speed limit signs.

[RPS]

Originally Posted by Spinner

the 55 speed limit happened in 1973 as a result of an oil embargo triggered by opec in response to the yom kippur war.

I hope we don’t see a similar version of history repeat.

Oil was down about $5 recently on government estimates that US oil consumption this year will be off significantly versus last -- I think something like 7 percent. Unfortunately oil is back up today about $5 due to saber rattling. If you look at it in US dollars, that's one expensive test rocket launch.

Spinner, I also remember the 55 MPH speed limit and fuel rationing. I got caught in south Florida visiting my GF when I was at UF and drove back to school on a Sunday when gasoline was not available. By driving at or just under 55 MPH the first part of the trip my mileage went from a typical 18 to 23.2 MPG (that number stuck in my head since we discussed it in my Internal Combustion Engines class). Once I got half way I realized I would make it with plenty of fuel to spare so I picked the speed up.

Not sure how I would feel about a national 55 MPH law, but if I get something in return maybe it wouldn’t be all bad. Allowing bikes to use the shoulders of all Interstates would probably sway me if I could horse trade with the government. Entrance and exit ramps would keep me from using them within cities, but I'd like the option anyway; particularly if traffic was traveling at 55.

[1centaur]

Originally Posted by Climb01742

but gutless democratic politicians certainly share some of the blame, too... see yesterday's vote on wire-tapping.

With 60 something votes, there must have been something attractive in the bill. My reading of the media is that the bill was a reasonable compromise. You don't want the phone companies giving the finger to the government if wiretapping needs to be done, and you don't want the government asking for wiretaps without sufficient rationale. Sounds like the bill reflects that.

My perhaps false impression of the complaints from the left is that they think the government is really eager to wiretap citizens rather than terrorists.

What's not to like?