Disqus - Friends of cargosquid

Re: mediabistro.com: FishbowlDC

TeaPartyLee — Mon, 26 May 2008 15:53:28 -0000

Ahh yes, the draft. Lefties just LOVE the draft because it would give them something that they could protest against that might actually get some traction. They remember all too well how central the draft was to their "anti-war" protests in the 60's, and they also remember how doing away with the draft took the wind right out of their sails.

Your super-secret hidden strategy to empower our enemies and destroy our nation is pathetically transparent to anyone with half a brain and a memory longer than their little finger.

Re: Retarded Policeman #18: Underage Girls

TeaPartyLee — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:43:24 -0000

The great thing about these videos is that they use humor to humanize downs syndrome. Some people complain about these videos and say that he's being made fun of. The truth is that these videos make fun of people who think that having downs syndrome means that someone is not a person. Most people with downs syndrome are hidden away, like a dirty secret. This guy is saying "I'm HERE, and yes I do have downs syndrome, and you know what, I'm going to make people laugh WITH me."

Re: Blacks, Gays Face Most H.I.V. Risk

TeaPartyLee — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 04:54:20 -0000

This really is depressing. Millions of blacks in Africa are infected with HIV, and now we find that the infection rate for blacks here in the US is higher than for other groups.

What gives?

Is this due to some genetic difference that makes blacks less able to fight off the virus to begin with? Some people, when exposed to HIV, will clear it from their system. They'll fight it off. Are caucasians better able to fight off this particular retrovirus?

Whenever I hear about HIV continuing to be a problem, it makes me want to start knocking heads together. AIDS is a preventable illness. It is something that, unless you're extremely unlucky, you can only get through risky behaviors, with promiscuity and IV drug use being the primary two.

Is it really so hard to be responsible? Is it so hard to avoid doing foolish and dangerous things?

I guess for some people the answer is yes.

Re: Katy Perry Plays Shun, Shag, Or Marry

TeaPartyLee — Thu, 28 May 2009 07:47:17 -0000

marry lindsay? pfft

Re: OKC man used scoped rifle to kill daughter

TeaPartyLee — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 01:38:19 -0000

My family trained me from a young age in the proper handling of firearms. You are right, you treat every gun as if it were loaded. Even if the bolt has been removed, the cylinder taken out, or the clip removed and the chamber cleared, you ALWAYS treat it as if it were loaded.

That being said, odds are this man murdered his daughter, a crime that I cannot understand and which causes me pain just to think about.

Re: Family disowns juvenile rape victim

TeaPartyLee — Fri, 04 Sep 2009 01:43:30 -0000

Ever wonder why Liberia is such a horrible place to live? Because this is how they deal with evil in their society. Character is destiny, and the character of a society is found in its culture.

Re: The Totalitarians Among Us – by David Horowitz

TeaPartyLee — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 15:15:20 -0000

Hawaii was a U.S. TERRITORY in 1959. It was not a separate country. it was not the Republic of Texas. It was American soil when the empire of Japan attacked us in 1941, and it was still American soil in 1959.

So, assuming that he was born there in 1959 instead of 1961, it is a distinction without a difference. Like it or not, he's a natural born American.

Please, if you are going to go after Obama, be competent about it. There is more than enough to be said about the man that is both true and damning without having to resort to this kind of nonsense. All these birther antics do is embolden the left and give them an excuse to cast those who oppose Obama's policies as fruitcakes and nutters.

Re: Visual Tour of GNOME 3 Shell in Ubuntu

TeaPartyLee — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 06:44:07 -0000

Where the hell is the task bar?

Follow standard conventions or people will avoid using it.

Re: IRS commissioner doesn't file his own taxes

TeaPartyLee — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 13:33:22 -0000

I've never understood the so called estate tax. Why should the government be able to pick the pockets of dead people? What right does the state have to the wealth that its citizens have worked to accumulate over their lifetime? Whatever tax that is rightfully owed has already been paid. If I cannot pass my assets on to my descendants, then I'd much rather see those assets destroyed than have them be stolen by the state. If you're going to tax inheritance, tax it as income. Punitive taxation hurts everyone.

Re: IRS commissioner doesn't file his own taxes

TeaPartyLee — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:33:22 -0000

Re: After Obama Rally, Dems Pin Blame On Bush - Hotline On Call

TeaPartyLee — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 22:03:20 -0000

Blaming a president, or a political party, for situations that evolved due to the interactive effects of a multitude of independent actors is retarded.

Politicians can, through their policies, affect the nation as a whole. They can introduce policies that make it easier for the citizens of this country to get on with the business of making money and living. They can get out of the way in other words. Or they can introduce policies that make this more difficult. They can interfere. But no matter who is in office, you can't blame them for economic blunders that were the result of bad decisions on the part of other people - private citizens. You might be able to blame the lefties for the community reinvestment act and its affect on the lending policies of banks, but you can't blame the lefties for the way that those banks went overboard in giving mortgages to people who should have been told to go jump.

Bush didn't create the problems we are seeing either, though some in his administration did see the warning signs. Some small steps were taken to soften the blow, but they were not successful. Simple solutions to complex problems created by conflicting interest groups are a fantasy.

Now we have Obama and the Dems in power and what do they do? Burn through their political capital in pursuit of communized medicine and print money like there is no tomorrow. Meanwhile things get worse on a daily basis.

They didn't CREATE the problems that our country faces, but you sure as hell can blame them for how they are RESPONDING to these problems.

I really do think that the lefties are suffering from delusional thinking and hysterical blindness. It isn't that they don't want to accept responsibility for the problems we are facing, but that they choose the most ludicrous target to assign blame to. It seems that in their universe they are always good and right and virtuous, and Bush is always to blame, even when NEITHER he nor they are responsible for the problem.

Re: After Obama Rally, Dems Pin Blame On Bush

TeaPartyLee — Sun, 17 Jan 2010 22:03:20 -0000

Blaming a president, or a political party, for situations that evolved due to the interactive effects of a multitude of independent actors is retarded.

They didn't CREATE the problems that our country faces, but you sure as hell can blame them for how they are RESPONDING to these problems.

Re: All the News that Fits Our Biases

TeaPartyLee — Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:24:13 -0000

The problem is not one of bias, but of fundamental DISHONESTY.

The Times tells lies of omission. Any stories that cannot be ignored are cooked.

Were the Times a producer of sales brochures, then this would be normal and expected. Marketing firms promote the virtues of the products they are hired to back, and ignore or downplay the virtues of the competition.

The Times however, is supposed to be a newspaper. It is supposed to be an organization that seeks to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. This is the standard of honesty that true journalism requires.

The truth does not have an agenda.

Re: Paterson says criticism is racially motivated

TeaPartyLee — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:56:35 -0000

If KKK Nazi fringe types are complaining about him, then that can be attributed to racism. If normal people are making valid complaints about his conduct, then describing that as "racism" is a pathetic lie. He's beholden to the same standards of conduct and character as anyone else. Having dark skin doesn't get him special treatment. The same rules apply to him as to everyone else. He needs to grow up.

Re: Thanks, Google:

TeaPartyLee — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 03:30:57 -0000

Prof. S.: “Corporations have rights, of course, but they also have obligations, legal and moral, to act with integrity and virtue.”Someone obviously isn’t a shareholder of Google.Google has an obligation not to violate the law or commit tortious acts.Beyond that, it’s obligation is to make money for (or otherwise abide by the directions from) its shareholders.

Making money for their shareholders is a goal, not an obligation, and certainly not the highest one.

Placing money as the highest ideal is how you end up with Enron.

Doing the right thing means that sometimes you're going to lose money, at least in the short term. Doing the right thing becomes a testament to your integrity, which in the long run is far more important than today's stock price in determining the future of your business.

When Tylenol bottles were poisoned in the early 80's, Johnson and Johnson didn't respond with moral cowardice. They recalled over 100 million dollars worth of the drug and instituted changes to their packaging. They also replaced capsules with caplets. Their swift action and willingness to take responsibility was rewarded in the long run. By the late 80's Tylenol was the best selling analgesic on the market.

They could have been cowards. They could have done a limited recall in the Chicago area and hired spin doctors to pretend that their products were still safe. They could have passed the buck to law enforcement. But they didn't. Instead they did the right thing, and that is why Tylenol is still a strong brand today.

Anyone who does not place virtue and integrity above profits is not someone I want to do business with. Such a person cannot be trusted. Sooner or later they will commit crimes in the pursuit of those profits (or to prevent losses) and toss me under the bus.

Re: Current Ubuntu 10.04 Review - InaTux Computers

TeaPartyLee — Thu, 25 Mar 2010 14:59:42 -0000

I am FURIOUS over someone's decision to mess up the user interface.

LEAVE THE BUTTONS WHERE THEY ARE AT.

Imagine someone suddenly re-arranged the pedals in your car so that the accelerator and brakes were reversed. Would you want to drive such a vehicle?

I've looked through the configuration trying to find where I can fix this, but there doesn't seem to be anyplace where this "feature" can be removed.

I'm sick and effing tired of programmers trying to dictate user interface functionality.

Re: The Further Left You Are the Less You Know About Economics:

TeaPartyLee — Sun, 09 May 2010 21:46:02 -0000

Michael Risch: But don’t these views reflect on assumptions about the world works as much as basic economics?1. If you think there’s already too much housing (a glut) then restricting development doesn’t make housing less “affordable.” Indeed, if one considers the externalities of overdevelopment, then added housing becomes far less affordable, even if the price of any given home goes down. Then there’s the issue of sprawl, such that restricted development in one area just means houses will be built somewhere else, and people will find housing at a price point that ties to location. 2. When you consider the cost of malpractice, then mandatory licensing might well reduce the overall cost of professional services. Additionally, licensing provides a signal function that might reduce the search costs of finding a qualified professional.

3. If rent controls are imposed after the fact in fully built areas. Imposing them shouldn’t affect the supply of housing at all for that area. Furthermore, given high demand in such areas, the demand might still exceed supply. Take California during boom times — no rent control, but many people who could not find a house. If houses were artificially kept at lower price levels, there would still have been a shortage.Granted, these play with the word definitions a bit and may even stretch things, but they still reflect assumptions about the world that are consistent with basic economics. Indeed, I think the questions themselves could reflect a simplification of economic thought that’s problematic.

1) Markets respond to a glut by reducing production. If there are more houses in a particular area than there are people to live in them, production will decline or cease until this imbalance is resolved. When the decline in demand is permanent, such as it is in Detroit, then housing will be torn down so that the land can be put to better use.

2) Malpractice costs are a product of lawsuits as a money-making enterprise for lawyers and pure barratry. The solution is tort reform. Licensing of doctors is necessary to guarantee competence in a life-and-death matter, but this does drive up the costs.

3) Rent controls in fully built areas may not affect the quantity of housing available, but it will affect the affordability of the housing that is there. If I have three houses and I'm forced to rent out two at below cost, I will shift the costs to the other house. This is why rent in NYC is astronomical. I live in a modest 2 bedroom condo in Phoenix, AZ. I found an apartment in NYC with virtually the same layout as mine. The price was $1,200,000. The price for my home was $93,000. Do the math.

The economic reality is that free markets are the best mechanism as they result in the most efficient distribution of resources. The old Marxists adage: From each according to his ability to each according to his need, is the pure essence of the free market. Those who can produce do so and what they create is exchanged with others who produce something else of value. The value that is created is greater than the sum of its parts.

Attempts to interfere with this process under the notion that the market is "unfair" because it rewards the capable and punishes the useless, only results in perversions of the market that make things worse for everyone. Winners take their ball and go elsewhere, leaving only the losers behind. Unless of course they'll be shot for trying to do so. The Berlin wall was not built to keep the west out after all.

Re: Jennifer Aniston is 'aged out,' says critic: You've got to be kidding

TeaPartyLee — Mon, 17 May 2010 23:45:46 -0000

I'm glad that a 40 year old woman can look as good as she does. While it is true that she's trying to play characters that are younger than her, she actually comes surprisingly close to pulling it off. I saw her in the bounty hunter recently and she looked GOOD. Not good for a woman of 40, but good period. To say "I'd hit that" is a definite understatement. The great thing about Jennifer Aniston is that she's amazingly lovely but retains that girl-next-door charm that makes her so appealing.

Aged out? How do these people come up with this nonsense? I'll bet you dollars to donuts that the critic who made that accusation is a woman. Only women try to tear women down in this way. No man would act that way towards a woman, or at least no normal (read straight) man.

This reminds me of the criticism I read about Scarlett Johannson from Lost in Translation. The critic spent a good paragraph talking about Scarlett's supposed cellulite. Sure enough, the critic was a jealous woman.

Re: William Atwood Shows Why It's Unwise to Send His Daughter Photos of Your Genitals

TeaPartyLee — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 19:44:00 -0000

The sick thing about this article is the following:

"A search of his home revealed zip ties, two stun guns and more than a dozen firearms."

This guy was wrong to kidnap and torture this guy, but owning firearms is no more wrong than speaking your mind. Both are protected by the bill of rights.

Worst of all, the father didn't even have a good reason for doing what he did. If he didn't want his grown daughter to ever see a penis then he shouldn't have had children in the first place.

If the guy had sent the girl images of kittens being mutilated or babies being cut into little piece, then there would be cause to go after him.

Re: Burrell Edward Mohler Sr. and His 4 Sons Accused of Serial Child Rape, Forcing Sex with Dog

TeaPartyLee — Mon, 07 Jun 2010 19:58:00 -0000

This reminds me of the satanic ritual abuse hysteria from a few years ago. People spent years in prison based upon outlandish accusations for which no physical evidence was ever found. In many cases exculpatory evidence was deliberately ignored. Some of the accusations against them were physically impossible. In every case that I'm aware of, the verdicts against them have been overturned.

I suspect that this may be what is happening here as well.

If these men are guilty of the things they have been accused of, then I hope that this truth comes out and they are punished accordingly.

But until such time that solid evidence is presented that proves their guilt, I'm not going to assume they are guilty.

Re: Anti-Wal-Mart Astroturf

TeaPartyLee — Tue, 08 Jun 2010 11:15:18 -0000

This is just another reason for me to do most of my shopping at Wal-Mart.

The left loves to pretend that Wal-Mart abuses its employees. This is a lie of course. It is hard to abuse someone by paying them minimum wage for a job that warrants it.

Not everyone gets to be an astronaut. The average IQ is 100. Because intelligence follows a normal distribution, this means that 50% of the population has an IQ lower than this. What kind of jobs do you think these people are going to have? How much money do you expect them to be able to earn? Unless they have a valuable talent that is not tied to their intelligence, most of them are going to wind up in menial positions making minimum wage. It is unfortunate that not everyone gets to be an astronaut, but it is also inevitable. All men are created equal. That is to say that everyone is equal before the law. No one has special rights or privileges based upon their birth. But that does not mean that human beings are equal in terms of character, ability, inclination, or ambition. These all vary wildly from one person to the next, and it is inevitable that those individuals who hare lacking in ability gravitate towards jobs that are not intellectually demanding. Even if you were to take someone in one of these menial positions and give them a higher paying job, they would not be able to perform that job. They have gravitated to their natural station in life.

What makes America a great nation is the fact that a person's station is not determined at birth. The children of these menial workers are not themselves forced to assume that same station if their talents and ambitions are greater than those of their parents. Given the genetic diversity of this country it is not at all uncommon for an above average child to be born to parents who are below average. The genius of America is that those kids have the opportunity to achieve their potential.

There are also some people who work at places like Wal Mart who are not lacking for intelligence, but who do lack ambition. Talented losers are nothing new. The other great thing about America is that should one of these underachievers ever come to their senses and see the error of their ways, opportunities to do something better with their life will still be there.

Wal-Mart also works very hard to prevent their employees from unionizing. At first glance that sounds horrible until you realize that unions in America have decayed into corrupt organizations that serve no one's interests but that of their leaders and their bosses in the Democratic Party. I wouldn't want to do business with a company whose workers belonged to a union unless I knew for certain that the particular union in question was NOT corrupt. Show me a union of the employees, by the employees, for the employees and I'll support it. The unions we have in this country today don't fit that description at all.

Re: The Drudge factor

TeaPartyLee — Tue, 15 Jun 2010 13:50:42 -0000

Appeals to racism?Such accusations are absurd and everyone knows it. But that absurdity is quite intentional. Rational accusations can be defended against, even refuted. But absurd accusations, constantly and vehemently repeated, will have precisely the effect that Goebbels said they would.

Re: More on Debt Collection - Business - The Atlantic

TeaPartyLee — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 15:02:53 -0000

I keep getting calls from 1-800 numbers, most of which come up as "unknown" on caller ID. Other calls actually have a name attached, but not one for a company I've ever done business with.

I simply don't answer the phone.

Unless I know who is calling, I let the answering machine get it.

Almost none of the 1800 callers actually leave a message. The few who do appear to be looking for someone else. Let them keep looking.

I keep a close eye on my bills and my credit history. I have no bad debts. All my accounts are current and are being paid as agreed. So there is no reason why I should waste my time talking to some phone monkey.

I also don't answer the door if I don't know the person who is knocking and/or why they are there.

Ignore these people, whether they be on the phone or otherwise. It won't necessarily make them go away, but it will mean you won't have to deal with them.

Re: More on Debt Collection - Business - The Atlantic

TeaPartyLee — Thu, 15 Jul 2010 15:09:50 -0000

Why are you defending unscrupulous debt collectors? If a person feels threatened by someone who is demanding money from them, then any person with a lick of common sense would call that extortion. Playing legalese games, and especially in defense of the bad guys, is dishonest.

Re: Harvard Kennedy School Revokes Degree Awarded to Russian Spy | The Harvard Crimson

TeaPartyLee — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 16:24:22 -0000

I find it interesting that Harvard thinks it can "revoke" a degree.

This guy lied about his identity. He was a Russian spy sent here to gather intelligence to be used against us by a foreign power. He was not a good man.

However, an education is not a piece of paper. Harvard cannot deprive him of the education he received while he was here. The most that the university can do is pretend that he didn't receive it, which is itself a lie.

To put it another way, imagine this: A man goes to a car dealership and buys a car. He pays cash. Later it is discovered that the money he used was stolen and the identity he used was false. The police have no idea who he was and there is no way to recover the car. It is gone and will never be seen again.

Does the dealership still possess that car, or does the man who bought it under fraudulent terms possess it? Would it be rational or true for that dealership to "revoke" that car on paper and pretend that it is still in their inventory?

That is pretty much what Harvard is doing here. A difference of opinion about where a car is physically located is easily resolved by referring to objective reality. That car is either still on the lot, or it isn't. There is no ambiguity there. The same is true here as well. Either this man completed the course work necessary to earn his degree, or he didn't. That question is easily answered by referring to his academic records and the evaluations of his instructors. If he completed his coursework satisfactorily, then he has that degree. Harvard cannot deprive him of the insight, understanding, and enlightenment that he now has as a result of completing that degree program. If these intellectual enhancements were never received as part of earning that degree, if the only value to that degree is that Harvard now claims you as one of its graduates, then that degree is already worthless except as something to pad one's resume and Harvard is nothing but a diploma mill.

But I for one do not believe that the degree he earned amounted to nothing but fluff and busywork. I believe that earning a master's degree in public administration requires a student to actually learn and master real knowledge. If this is true, then for them to say that they have "revoked" his degree is a misrepresentation of the truth equal to the one he perpetrated by pretending to be someone else while earning it.

The honest thing for Harvard to do, if it wishes to disassociate itself from this man, is to simply state that they are doing precisely that. Divorce him. Disown him. Disclaim him. But don't pretend that his degree is non-existent because that simply isn't true. Harvard lessens itself by publishing that fiction.