Kid Gleason Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 I don't know. I love Thompson, but I think for all the wrong reasons. But Apu knows his s***. It's like my buddy Curt. I love Curt, and consider him my best friend. He was my best man, and he is the godfather of my first born. But I never understood the idea of going along with all of Thompson's speakings. The man saw friggin' giant reptiles and thought they were alive in a bar for crying out loud. Sure, he was HEAVILY medicated at the time, but how f-ed up was his mind from all of the abuse? Ya know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 Yes it is the halve nots that pay the highest price to live in America. They work for the rich, fight wars for the rich, clean up after the rich, build railroads, stare at atomic blasts to study the effects, and a thousand other things that we could probably think of. I imagine that's the same in every society, but probably better here. I cannot envision a working society where that isn't going to happen. I also believe, we should realize that the poor are probably less educate and probably, as a group, with less mental resources and skills in reasoning, problem solving, etc. Mix in a little mental disease and defect, and you got a nightmare we've been seeing. They have jobs where a supervisor tells them to do this, that, and this other thing. Then follows them around and asks them if they did this, that, and the other thing. Many have lived in their neighborhoods all their lives, and have never been outside the city. It's not like they vacationed at Sea World and think, hey, let's go there. They can survive in neighborhoods that would kill most of us without the "street smarts", but they have an equally difficult time trying to survive the evacuation. I can understand the strong urge to stay and pray. Sadly, it killed a lot of them. I'm not certain, short of arresting them and sending them away, what anyone could have done. The poor are the most at risk group in our nation. We see what a natural disaster did. They are also most likely to die younger and in almost every disease category. Without the financial resources for better health care, minor stuff becomes major. Their diets are high in fats and cholesterol. They get less exercise. They live in dirtier surroundings. They are much more likely to be a crime victim. Those are cold, sobering, realities. But should we be made to feel guilty because we won the biggest lottery? We won the "my sperm was the fastest and hit the egg lottery" and we came up (for the most part here) white, middle class, suburbanites. What I believe we do owe, and many here have done, is share. Share our time, share our prayers, share our talents, share our resources, share our love. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Middle Buffalo Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 6, 2005 -> 08:32 AM) I also believe, we should realize that the poor are probably less educate and probably, as a group, with less mental resources and skills in reasoning, problem solving, etc. I would tend to disagree with the notion that the poor have a lower ability to reason and problem solve. The biggest problem and failure in this case was that the government (local and national) did not have an adequate evacuation plan and alert system in place. Think of the logistics. How would people move from inner city of New Orleans to a safer place? Was there transportation ordered by the governing bodies? Are these people expected to walk miles and miles to safety? How far? Where do they stay? How do they get back to their homes when the storm passes (assuming it passes without major damage)? If were told to leave your home, and you didn't have transportation, some members of your family were sickly or very young and unable to walk for miles at a time, and had no idea where you were supposed to go, what would you do? Probably stay put and hope like heck the threat passed without harm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 QUOTE(Middle Buffalo @ Sep 6, 2005 -> 10:53 AM) I would tend to disagree with the notion that the poor have a lower ability to reason and problem solve. The biggest problem and failure in this case was that the government (local and national) did not have an adequate evacuation plan and alert system in place. Think of the logistics. How would people move from inner city of New Orleans to a safer place? Was there transportation ordered by the governing bodies? Are these people expected to walk miles and miles to safety? How far? Where do they stay? How do they get back to their homes when the storm passes (assuming it passes without major damage)? If were told to leave your home, and you didn't have transportation, some members of your family were sickly or very young and unable to walk for miles at a time, and had no idea where you were supposed to go, what would you do? Probably stay put and hope like heck the threat passed without harm. I agree with your second paragraph. Why I say that the poor have lower abilities to reason and problem solve, is based on having a wider range of experiences and solutions to draw on. The ability to apply a solution from problem A to problem B is more evident in higher IQs. The poor, who generally don't travel much, do not cruise the internet much, do not watch Discovery channel as much, and who did not attain higher levels of education, do not have those experiences to draw upon. The mechanics of problem solving may be the same, but shifting through 3 answers vs. shifting through 3,000 answers may be the difference. We could get into the nature vs. nuture debate in all this, but I don't think it would make a difference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AngelasDaddy0427 Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 I did have to LOL at the part about Global Warming not existing... I think him and Carl Everett would make good buddies... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 QUOTE(Kid Gleason @ Sep 6, 2005 -> 06:59 AM) That's really odd that you would have a strong hatred for Nixon. How old were you while he was in office? Just remember this about Richard Nixon...he personally extended the Vietnam war by 5 years. Johnson had an agreement for a framework of a peace settlement in October 1968, but Nixon arranged for it to be sabotaged so that there wouldn't be an "October Surprise" that could defeat him in the election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 6, 2005 -> 04:05 PM) We could get into the nature vs. nuture debate in all this, but I don't think it would make a difference. Sounds like a bad Eddie Murphy/Dan Akroyd movie to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 6, 2005 -> 11:42 AM) Just remember this about Richard Nixon...he personally extended the Vietnam war by 5 years. Johnson had an agreement for a framework of a peace settlement in October 1968, but Nixon arranged for it to be sabotaged so that there wouldn't be an "October Surprise" that could defeat him in the election. Do you have a source? This is the first I've ever heard that theory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Middle Buffalo Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 6, 2005 -> 09:05 AM) We could get into the nature vs. nuture debate in all this. Um, I'll wait for Juggernaut to supply the mathmatical equation and skip the debate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlaSoxxJim Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 6, 2005 -> 12:32 PM) Do you have a source? This is the first I've ever heard that theory. http://www.thenation.com/doc/20001106/wiener Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G&T Posted September 6, 2005 Share Posted September 6, 2005 QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Sep 6, 2005 -> 12:36 PM) http://www.thenation.com/doc/20001106/wiener Is The Nation a credible source. I thought it was ultra liberal. And didn't Nixon get the US out of Vietnam? I took a Vietnam War Era class and all of this is acurate except interpretation differs. Even the article states that Theiu would have ignored peace talks without prodding from Nixon, and that's the way I learned it in my class. While it was wrong to do without question it really made no difference. Anyway, here's a story that I heard about LBJ because it's kinda funny. He was having a meeting with some aids and was asked why the US continued to fight in Vietnam. He stands up from his desk, unzips his pants, displays an erection and says "This...this is why we are in Vietnam." I know it seems ridiculous but if when you hear about LBJ it seems true. By the way, don't assume that Nixon was some horrible person because of Watergate. He was paranoid but not a bad president. And he really believed in the power of family and hard work. If he hadn't been so insane he would be regarded well today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 QUOTE(G&T @ Sep 6, 2005 -> 12:41 PM) Is The Nation a credible source. I thought it was ultra liberal. And didn't Nixon get the US out of Vietnam? I took a Vietnam War Era class and all of this is acurate except interpretation differs. Even the article states that Theiu would have ignored peace talks without prodding from Nixon, and that's the way I learned it in my class. While it was wrong to do without question it really made no difference. Anyway, here's a story that I heard about LBJ because it's kinda funny. He was having a meeting with some aids and was asked why the US continued to fight in Vietnam. He stands up from his desk, unzips his pants, displays an erection and says "This...this is why we are in Vietnam." I know it seems ridiculous but if when you hear about LBJ it seems true. By the way, don't assume that Nixon was some horrible person because of Watergate. He was paranoid but not a bad president. And he really believed in the power of family and hard work. If he hadn't been so insane he would be regarded well today. He was paranoid because he was a huge anti-Semite, said we should flood Vietnamese villages etc. etc. Listen to the Nixon Tapes -- the man was a f***ing loon & a gigantic moron. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted September 7, 2005 Share Posted September 7, 2005 Found this today. In the Salt Lake Tribune. If this is true, this would be a great reason to blame the President. http://www.sltrib.com/utah/ci_3004197 But as specific orders began arriving to the firefighters in Atlanta, a team of 50 Monday morning quickly was ushered onto a flight headed for Louisiana. The crew's first assignment: to stand beside President Bush as he tours devastated areas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.