The New and Improved Republican Party . . .

[outriding]

Originally posted by: Corn

This, it appears, is what compassionate conservatism really means. The conservative part is a stern and sometimes intrusive government to regulate the citizenry, but with a hands-off attitude toward business. The compassionate end involves some large federal programs combined with unending sympathy for the demands of special interests. If only it all added up.

Eh, wah!

So what was the reason behind the bill that was passed in 1995 /ish that overturned a bill that was in place just after the crash of the 1920's that gave big business total immunity to fraud ?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: dahunan
I hope so... White Collar criminals think they aren't like those criminals who use a gun or knife..etc. NO.. they are WORSE.. The collapse of Enron hurt 1000's of American Middle Class families

But they aren't violent criminals??? What's your point? Steal enough money and it is a violent crime?

I think he explains it quite well. Look at Parmalat, they have been stealing for over 10 years and what was thought to be a solid investment 2 weeks ago turns out to be a virtual empty shell. This and Enron are insidious, no one knows what's happening until it's beyond too late.

Reminds me of the words of a great poet of our time:

"Steal a little they'll throw you in jail
Steal a lot and they'll make you King"

I'm still confused on how someone could say a property crime is worse than a violent crime. Because people lose money? A lot of people were a victim of Worldcom or Enron. I lost a nice chunk in Worldcom, and I agree those people should do some time, but they didn't murder me.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Captain nice post: IMO Most modern republians can only be defined as traitors to the american way of life and the consitution. Heres why, They support international bodies like GATT who's rule superceeds the consititution and the democratic will of the people of the USA for it's corporate benefactors. They love to trade with third world dictatorships, even our mortal enemies, communists like china. Not only do they help these regimes stay in power they enable them with funds and technology to continue thier oppression of thier peoples. From South America to the Asia this is our modus operandi. They don't object to American corps moving headqauaters to banking havens to aviod taxes like a small business or ordinary american has to pay even though they reap the most benefit from these taxes either in national policy or welfare for thier wares. And finally they don't believe in the bill of rights unless it applies to them or Rush Limbaugh. Just look how they love manditory minimums for petty drug offenders which can only be defined as "Cruel". Suspension of habeus corpus for anyone the feds say is a terrorist w/o judical review. And like all militants don't want anyone other than them to be armed..see NRA's stance on "crimminals" second amendment right or lack thereof.

Posts of beauty and the TRUTH. Fantastic guys, you are doing online what is currently not able to be done over the airways controlled by Rush and Hannity, to break the brainwashing spell. About 300 days to make it count and I do mean count as in it will be done right this time.

 

[Drift3r]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: dahunan
I hope so... White Collar criminals think they aren't like those criminals who use a gun or knife..etc. NO.. they are WORSE.. The collapse of Enron hurt 1000's of American Middle Class families

But they aren't violent criminals??? What's your point? Steal enough money and it is a violent crime?

Drug dealing is not a violent crime.....stealing credit cards and raking up a huge bill for the owner that puts him/her in debt for the rest of their lives is not a violent crime. Of course in both cases the petty crooks each recieve real time and are put in real prisons. Why should white collar crime be any differrent ?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: dahunan
I hope so... White Collar criminals think they aren't like those criminals who use a gun or knife..etc. NO.. they are WORSE.. The collapse of Enron hurt 1000's of American Middle Class families

But they aren't violent criminals??? What's your point? Steal enough money and it is a violent crime?

I think he explains it quite well. Look at Parmalat, they have been stealing for over 10 years and what was thought to be a solid investment 2 weeks ago turns out to be a virtual empty shell. This and Enron are insidious, no one knows what's happening until it's beyond too late.

Reminds me of the words of a great poet of our time:

"Steal a little they'll throw you in jail
Steal a lot and they'll make you King"

I'm still confused on how someone could say a property crime is worse than a violent crime. Because people lose money? A lot of people were a victim of Worldcom or Enron. I lost a nice chunk in Worldcom, and I agree those people should do some time, but they didn't murder me.

Dahunan didn't say Mudrer, you did. He was comparing Armed Robbers to White Collar criminals.

 

[CaptnKirk]

I wanted to put this in to an earlier post, as it deals with what I consider to be
a position of fear within our own society.

White Male Voters for Bush

That is the Paranoia of the Insecure White Male who thinks that every minority
is out to get his job or take the tax dollar. It is almost a continuation of the Klan
mentality that the Southern Democrats used in the 60's.
The only difference is that today it is the Republican Party that has embraced the Southern Religeous Conservative Agenda, as so many of those Democrats from the past switched party affiliation to reap the profits of Corporate shilling. The list of Ex-Demos that are now Republicans is stunning until you see the narrow minded mentality that they bring to the game.

White collar crime not a 'Violent' type of crime ? How about what it has done to those who had all that they had either in service to a company or capital invested in the stock that are left holding an empty bag when the Executives took the cash and ran ? Many were right on the cusp of their retitrement and have no retirement to draw funds from. Every cent that they saved is gone, they have lost thier job, cannot make their mortgage payments and car paymnents and either have or will loose their homes, transportation, and future. Many will die from the stress to their bodies and minds, as they have to start over - and maybe in 10 to 20 years have enough to retire on - providing that they are still alive, what's the chance of that to a widow in her 70's ?

Violent ?
Just as sure as if you had pulled out a gun and forced them to give up all they had in the bank.
A heart attack due to that financial stress is just as dead as if they had gone ahead and pulled the trigger, these ;non-compassionate corporate thugs are just as much terrorists to our sociery as the al Queda is today or the Al Capone Mafia was to society back in the 20's and 30's.

Criminal - Criminals - Criminal Politics.

Ryan is not going to be the last one indicted, he's only the current one - there will be another just behind him in a few more days or weeks - watch for another Rerpublican Congressman, Senator, or Governor in the North East or Atlantic to be caught soon. I cna't remember the name or the State but it was in the works before Ryan took the headlines.

 

[Red Dawn]

Here's a rant that I gleemed from another site. This is the rant of a White Male who feels disenfranchised. It's long but it's rather humorous even though that wasn't the OP's intent.

We have become a nation of women.

It wasn't always this way, of course. There was a time when men put their signatures to a document, knowing full well that this single act would result in their execution if captured, and in the forfeiture of their property to the State. Their wives and children would be turned out by the soldiers, and their farms and businesses most probably given to someone who didn't sign the document.

There was a time when men went to their certain death, with expressions like "You all can go to hell. I'm going to Texas." (Davy Crockett, to the House of Representatives, before going to the Alamo.)

There was a time when men went to war, sometimes against their own families, so that other men could be free. And there was a time when men went to war because we recognized evil when we saw it, and knew that it had to be stamped out.

There was even a time when a President of the United States threatened to punch a man in the face and kick him in the balls, because the man had the temerity to say bad things about the President's daughter's singing.

We're not like that anymore.

Now, little boys in grade school are suspended for playing cowboys and Indians, cops and crooks, and all the other familiar variations of "good guy vs. bad guy" that helped them learn, at an early age, what it was like to have decent men hunt you down, because you were a lawbreaker.

Now, men are taught that violence is bad -- that when a thief breaks into your house, or threatens you in the street, that the proper way to deal with this is to "give him what he wants", instead of taking a horsewhip to the rascal or shooting him dead where he stands.

Now, men's fashion includes not a man dressed in a three-piece suit, but a tight sweater worn by a man with breasts.

Now, warning labels are indelibly etched into gun barrels, as though men have somehow forgotten that guns are dangerous things.

Now, men are given Ritalin as little boys, so that their natural aggressiveness, curiosity and restlessness can be controlled, instead of nurtured and directed.

And finally, our President, who happens to have been a qualified fighter pilot, lands on an aircraft carrier wearing a flight suit, and is immediately dismissed with words like "swaggering", "macho" and the favorite epithet of Euro girly-men, "cowboy". Of course he was bound to get that reaction -- and most especially from the Press in Europe, because the process of male pussification Over There is almost complete.

How did we get to this?

In the first instance, what we have to understand is that America is first and foremost, a culture dominated by one figure: Mother. It wasn't always so: there was a time when it was Father who ruled the home, worked at his job, and voted.

But in the twentieth century, women became more and more involved in the body politic, and in industry, and in the media -- and mostly, this has not been a good thing. When women got the vote, it was inevitable that government was going to become more powerful, more intrusive, and more "protective" (ie. more coddling), because women are hard-wired to treasure security more than uncertainty and danger. It was therefore inevitable that their feminine influence on politics was going to emphasize (lowercase "s") social security.

I am aware of the fury that this statement is going to arouse, and I don't care a fig.

What I care about is the fact that since the beginning of the twentieth century, there has been a concerted campaign to denigrate men, to reduce them to figures of fun, and to render them impotent, figuratively speaking.

I'm going to illustrate this by talking about TV, because TV is a reliable barometer of our culture.

In the 1950s, the TV Dad was seen as the lovable goofball -- perhaps the beginning of the trend -- BUT he was still the one who brought home the bacon, and was the main source of discipline (think of the line: "Wait until your father gets home!").

From that, we went to this: the Cheerios TV ad.

Now, for those who haven't seen this piece of , I'm going to go over it, from memory, because it epitomizes everything I hate about the campaign to pussify men. The scene opens at the morning breakfast table, where the two kids are sitting with Dad at the table, while Mom prepares stuff on the kitchen counter. The dialogue goes something like this:
Little girl (note, not little boy): Daddy, why do we eat Cheerios?
Dad: Because they contain fiber, and all sorts of stuff that's good for the heart. I eat it now, because of that.
LG: Did you always eat stuff that was bad for your heart, Daddy?
Dad (humorously): I did, until I met your mother.
Mother (not humorously): Daddy did a lot of stupid things before he met your mother.

Now, every time I see that TV ad, I have to be restrained from shooting the TV with a .45 Colt. If you want a microcosm of how men have become less than men, this is the perfect example.

What Dad should have replied to Mommy's little dig: Yes, Sally, that's true: I did do a lot of stupid things before I met your mother. I even slept with your Aunt Ruth a few times, before I met your mother.

That's what I would have said, anyway, if my wife had ever attempted to castrate me in front of the kids like that.

But that's not what men do, of course. What this guy is going to do is smile ruefully, finish his cereal, and then go and ~uck his secretary, who doesn't try to cut his balls off on a daily basis. Then, when the affair is discovered, people are going to rally around the castrating bitch called his wife, and call him all sorts of names. He'll lose custody of his kids, and they will be brought up by our ultimate modern-day figure of sympathy: The Single Mom.

You know what? Some women deserve to be single moms.

When I first started this website, I think my primary aim was to blow off steam at the stupidity of our society.

Because I have fairly set views on what constitutes right and wrong, I have no difficulty in calling Bill Clinton, for example, a ~ucking liar and hypocrite.

But most of all, I do this website because I love being a man. Amongst other things, I talk about guns, self-defense, politics, beautiful women, sports, warfare, hunting, and power tools -- all the things that being a man entails. All this stuff gives me pleasure.

And it doesn't take much to see when all the things I love are being threatened: for instance, when Tim Allen's excellent comedy routine on being a man is reduced to a ~ucking sitcom called Home Improvement. The show should have been called Man Improvement, because that's what every single plotline entailed: turning a man into a "better" person, instead of just leaving him alone to work on restoring the vintage sports car in his garage. I stopped watching the show after about four episodes.

("The Man Show" was better, at least for the first season -- men leering at chicks, men ~ucking around with ridiculous games like "pin the bra on the boobies", men having beer-drinking competitions, and women on trampolines. Excellent stuff, only not strong enough. I don't watch it anymore, either, because it's plain that the idea has been subverted by girly-men, and turned into a parody of itself.)

Finally, we come to the TV show which to my mind epitomizes everything bad about what we have become: Queer Eye For The Straight Guy. Playing on the homo Bravo Channel, this piece of excrement has taken over the popular culture by storm (and so far, the only counter has been the wonderful South Park episode which took it apart for the bull it is).

I'm sorry, but the premise of the show nauseates me. A bunch of homosexuals trying to "improve" ordinary men into something "better" (ie. more acceptable to women): changing the guy's clothes, his home decor, his music -- for ~uck's sake, what kind of girly-man would allow these simpering butt-bandits to change his life around?

Yes, the men are, by and large, slobs. Big ~ucking deal. Last time I looked, that's normal. Men are slobs, and that only changes when women try to civilize them by marriage. That's the natural order of things.

You know the definition of homosexual men we used in Chicago? "Men with small dogs who own very tidy apartments."

Real men, on the other hand, have big ~ucking mean-ass dogs: Rhodesian ridgebacks, bull terriers and Rottweilers, or else working dogs like pointers or retrievers which go hunting with them and slobber all over the furniture.

Women own lapdogs.

Which is why women are trying to get dog-fighting and cock-fighting banned -- they'd ban boxing too, if they could -- because it's "mean and cruel". No ~hit, Shirley. Hell, I don't like the idea of fighting dogs, either, but I don't have a problem with men who do. Dogs and cocks fight. So do men. No wonder we have an affinity for it.

My website has become fairly popular with men, and in the beginning, this really surprised me, because I didn't think I was doing anything special.

That's not what I think now. I must have had well over five thousand men write to me to say stuff like "Yes! I agree! I was so angry when I read about [insert atrocity of choice], but I though I was the only one."

No, you're not alone, my friends, and nor am I.

Out there, there is a huge number of men who are sick of it. We're sick of being made figures of fun and ridicule; we're sick of having girly-men like journalists, advertising agency execs and movie stars decide on "what is a man"; we're sick of women treating us like children, and we're really ~ucking sick of girly-men politicians who pander to women by passing an ever-increasing raft of Nanny laws and regulations (the legal equivalent of public-school Ritalin), which prevent us from hunting, racing our cars and motorcycles, smoking, flirting with women at the office, getting into fistfights over women, shooting criminals and doing all the fine things which being a man entails.

When Annika Sorenstam was allowed to play in that tournament on the men's PGA tour, all the men should have refused to play -- Vijay Singh was the only one with balls to stand up for a principle, and he was absolutely excoriated for being a "chauvinist". Bull$hit. He wasn't a chauvinist, he was being a man. All the rest of the players -- Woods, Mickleson, the lot -- are girls by comparison. And, needless to say, Vijay isn't an American, nor a European, which is probably why he still has a pair hanging between his legs, and they're not hanging on the wall as his wife's trophy.

~uck this, I'm sick of it.

I don't see why I should put up with this bull$hit any longer -- hell, I don't see why any man should put up with this bull$hit any longer.

I don't see why men should have become feminized, accept that we allowed it to happen -- and you know why we let it happen? Because it's goddamned easier to do so. Unfortunately, we've allowed it to go too far, and our maleness has become too pussified for words.

At this point, I could have gone two ways: the first would be to say, "...and I don't know if we'll get it back. The process has become too entrenched, the cultural zeitgeist of men as girls has become part of the social fabric, and there's not much we can do about it."

But I'm not going to do that. To quote John Belushi (who was, incidentally, a real man and not a ~ucking woman): "Did we quit when Tojo bombed Pearl Harbor?"

Well, I'm not going to quit. ~uck that. One of the characteristics of the non-pussified man (and this should strike fear into the hearts of women and girly-men everywhere) is that he never quits just because the odds seem overwhelming. Omaha Beach, guys.

I want a real man as President -- not Al Gore, who had to hire a consultant to show him how to be an Alpha male, and french-kiss his wife on live TV to "prove" to the world that he was a man, when we all knew that real men don't have to do that $hit.

And I want the Real Man President to surround himself with other Real Men, like Rumsfeld, and Ashcroft, and yes, Rice (who is more of a Real Man than those a$$wipes Colin Powell and Norman Mineta).

I want our government to be more like Dad -- kind, helpful, but not afraid to punish us when we ~uck up, instead of helping us excuse our actions.

I want our government of real men to start rolling back the Nanny State, in all its horrible manifestations of over-protectiveness, intrusiveness and "Mommy Knows Best What's Good For You" regulations.

I want our culture to become more male -- not the satirical kind of male, like The Man Show, or the cartoonish figures of Stallone, Van Damme or Schwartzenegger. (Note to the Hollywood execs: We absolutely ~ucking loathe chick movies about feelings and relationships and all that feminine jive. We want more John Waynes, Robert Mitchums, Bruce Willises, and Clint Eastwoods. Never mind that it's simplistic -- we like simple, we are simple, we are men -- our lives are uncomplicated, and we like it that way. We Were Soldiers was a great movie, and you know why? Because you could have cut out all the female parts, and it still would have been a great movie, because it was about Real Men. Try cutting out all the female parts in a Woody Allen movie -- you'd end up with the opening and closing credits.)

I want our literature to become more male, less female. Men shouldn't buy "self-help" books unless the subject matter is car maintenance, golf swing improvement or how to disassemble a ~ucking Browning BAR. We don't improve ourselves, we improve our stuff.

And finally, I want men everywhere to going back to being Real Men. To open doors for women, to drive fast cars, to smoke cigars after a meal, to get drunk occasionally and, in the words of Col. Jeff Cooper, one of the last of the Real Men: "to ride, shoot straight, and speak the truth."

In every sense of the word. We know what the word "is" means.

Because that's all that being a Real Man involves. You don't have to become a ~ucking cartoon male, either: I'm not going back to stoning women for adultery like those Muslim a$$holes do, nor am I suggesting we support that perversion of being a Real Man, gangsta rap artists (those ~ucking pussies -- they wouldn't last thirty seconds against a couple of genuine tough guys that I know).

Speaking of rap music, do you want to know why more White boys buy that crap than Black boys do? You know why rape is such a problem on college campuses? Why binge drinking is a problem among college freshmen?

It's a reaction: a reaction against being pussified. And I understand it, completely. Young males are aggressive, they do fight amongst themselves, they are destructive, and all this does happen for a purpose.

Because only the strong men propagate.

And women know it. You want to know why I know this to be true? Because powerful men still attract women. Women, even liberal women, swooned over George Bush in a naval aviator's uniform. Donald Trump still gets access to some of the most beautiful pussy available, despite looking like a medieval gargoyle. Donald Rumsfeld, if he wanted to, could ~uck 90% of all women over 50 if he wanted to, and a goodly portion of younger ones too.

And he won't. Because Rummy's been married to the same woman for fifty years, and he wouldn't toss that away for a quickie. He's a Real Man. No wonder the Euros hate and fear him.

We'd better get more like him, we'd better become more like him, because if we don't, men will become a footnote to history.

LOL

 

[Zebo]

Dude sounds XXY chromazone. Aww poor baby, now that woman actually have a choice not to breed and stay with neanderthals like him he's pissed off. Sorry bud, it's called democratization of social as well as political and economic life. I see many divorces and self administered hand jobs in your future. Or he just orders up a third world babe who does'nt know any better..for awaile.

Ar'nt the taliban practicing what he likes..after all he likes vinjay a dude from a country where killing the woman after the dowrey is commonplace?

 

[chess9]

Red:

Not to worry, most men are still "real" men.

The biggest threat to our "man" hood is not tv, but McDonald's. I just came back from running a half-marathon. The people at the race were built like the people I knew in the '50's, fit not fat. I then went shopping, albeit briefly , with my wife. Mall people are FAT. Look around, most of the guys are lard asses. Overworked, overfed, and probably mostly disatisfied and not because of tv. When my neighbors take out their trash I make sure I have the phone in my hand so I can call 911 just in case one of them keels over. One guy is 6'2" tall and about 300 pounds. An ex-cop.... Sheezh, so sad.

You wanna' be a man, then take care of your body. Watch what you eat and get some very, very, very (did I mention very) vigorous exercise 4-5 days per week. If you don't want to be a pussy, no one is going to turn you into one. You can laugh at Will and Grace without BEING Will and Grace.

DON'T BLAME SOMEONE ELSE FOR YOUR PROBLEMS, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.

I'm not talking about you personally Red, 'cause I know you take care of your body, what with the running and the trips to the spa.

-Robert

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: chess9
Red:

Not to worry, most men are still "real" men.

The biggest threat to our "man" hood is not tv, but McDonald's. I just came back from running a half-marathon. The people at the race were built like the people I knew in the '50's, fit not fat. I then went shopping, albeit briefly , with my wife. Mall people are FAT. Look around, most of the guys are lard asses. Overworked, overfed, and probably mostly disatisfied and not because of tv. When my neighbors take out their trash I make sure I have the phone in my hand so I can call 911 just in case one of them keels over. One guy is 6'2" tall and about 300 pounds. An ex-cop.... Sheezh, so sad.

You wanna' be a man, then take care of your body. Watch what you eat and get some very, very, very (did I mention very) vigorous exercise 4-5 days per week. If you don't want to be a pussy, no one is going to turn you into one. You can laugh at Will and Grace without BEING Will and Grace.

DON'T BLAME SOMEONE ELSE FOR YOUR PROBLEMS, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU ARE THE PROBLEM.

I'm not talking about you personally Red, 'cause I know you take care of your body, what with the running and the trips to the spa.

-Robert

I hear ya. Moving to Boston from fitness orientated CA I was shocked to see so many lard asses here, especially among the youths. Of course with a Dunkin Donuts on every corner I can understand why it?s that way.

 

[Bosshawk1]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: dahunan
I hope so... White Collar criminals think they aren't like those criminals who use a gun or knife..etc. NO.. they are WORSE.. The collapse of Enron hurt 1000's of American Middle Class families

But they aren't violent criminals??? What's your point? Steal enough money and it is a violent crime?

I think he explains it quite well. Look at Parmalat, they have been stealing for over 10 years and what was thought to be a solid investment 2 weeks ago turns out to be a virtual empty shell. This and Enron are insidious, no one knows what's happening until it's beyond too late.

Reminds me of the words of a great poet of our time:

"Steal a little they'll throw you in jail
Steal a lot and they'll make you King"

I'm still confused on how someone could say a property crime is worse than a violent crime. Because people lose money? A lot of people were a victim of Worldcom or Enron. I lost a nice chunk in Worldcom, and I agree those people should do some time, but they didn't murder me.

Dahunan didn't say Mudrer, you did. He was comparing Armed Robbers to White Collar criminals.

Huh? He said "Criminals" using a knife or a gun. How does that not fit a murderer as well. I think you are playing semantics and not attacking the argument. Violent crime is violent crime. Stop playing semantics...

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Bosshawk1

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: dahunan
I hope so... White Collar criminals think they aren't like those criminals who use a gun or knife..etc. NO.. they are WORSE.. The collapse of Enron hurt 1000's of American Middle Class families

But they aren't violent criminals??? What's your point? Steal enough money and it is a violent crime?

I think he explains it quite well. Look at Parmalat, they have been stealing for over 10 years and what was thought to be a solid investment 2 weeks ago turns out to be a virtual empty shell. This and Enron are insidious, no one knows what's happening until it's beyond too late.

Reminds me of the words of a great poet of our time:

"Steal a little they'll throw you in jail
Steal a lot and they'll make you King"

I'm still confused on how someone could say a property crime is worse than a violent crime. Because people lose money? A lot of people were a victim of Worldcom or Enron. I lost a nice chunk in Worldcom, and I agree those people should do some time, but they didn't murder me.

Dahunan didn't say Mudrer, you did. He was comparing Armed Robbers to White Collar criminals.

Huh? He said "Criminals" using a knife or a gun. How does that not fit a murderer as well. I think you are playing semantics and not attacking the argument. Violent crime is violent crime. Stop playing semantics...

Semantics, I suppose only Dahunan knows for sure. Dahunan mentioned Knife/Gun, but didn't specify the Crime committed. I think he may have mentioned them in context with the thread, that being Theft. Dahunan didn't even bing up "violence", that too was Mill's "semantics". So maybe I'm playing Semantics or maybe I'm using Context.

 

[Bosshawk1]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Bosshawk1

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: dahunan
I hope so... White Collar criminals think they aren't like those criminals who use a gun or knife..etc. NO.. they are WORSE.. The collapse of Enron hurt 1000's of American Middle Class families

But they aren't violent criminals??? What's your point? Steal enough money and it is a violent crime?

I think he explains it quite well. Look at Parmalat, they have been stealing for over 10 years and what was thought to be a solid investment 2 weeks ago turns out to be a virtual empty shell. This and Enron are insidious, no one knows what's happening until it's beyond too late.

Reminds me of the words of a great poet of our time:

"Steal a little they'll throw you in jail
Steal a lot and they'll make you King"

I'm still confused on how someone could say a property crime is worse than a violent crime. Because people lose money? A lot of people were a victim of Worldcom or Enron. I lost a nice chunk in Worldcom, and I agree those people should do some time, but they didn't murder me.

Dahunan didn't say Mudrer, you did. He was comparing Armed Robbers to White Collar criminals.

Huh? He said "Criminals" using a knife or a gun. How does that not fit a murderer as well. I think you are playing semantics and not attacking the argument. Violent crime is violent crime. Stop playing semantics...

Semantics, I suppose only Dahunan knows for sure. Dahunan mentioned Knife/Gun, but didn't specify the Crime committed. I think he may have mentioned them in context with the thread, that being Theft. Dahunan didn't even bing up "violence", that too was Mill's "semantics". So maybe I'm playing Semantics or maybe I'm using Context.

Is using a gun or a knife to commit a crime not violent crime?

 

[Mill]

BTW, in this thread Bosshawk1=Mill. I forgot to log out of my friend's account at his house before I posted.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Bosshawk1

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Bosshawk1

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: dahunan
I hope so... White Collar criminals think they aren't like those criminals who use a gun or knife..etc. NO.. they are WORSE.. The collapse of Enron hurt 1000's of American Middle Class families

But they aren't violent criminals??? What's your point? Steal enough money and it is a violent crime?

I think he explains it quite well. Look at Parmalat, they have been stealing for over 10 years and what was thought to be a solid investment 2 weeks ago turns out to be a virtual empty shell. This and Enron are insidious, no one knows what's happening until it's beyond too late.

Reminds me of the words of a great poet of our time:

"Steal a little they'll throw you in jail
Steal a lot and they'll make you King"

I'm still confused on how someone could say a property crime is worse than a violent crime. Because people lose money? A lot of people were a victim of Worldcom or Enron. I lost a nice chunk in Worldcom, and I agree those people should do some time, but they didn't murder me.

Dahunan didn't say Mudrer, you did. He was comparing Armed Robbers to White Collar criminals.

Huh? He said "Criminals" using a knife or a gun. How does that not fit a murderer as well. I think you are playing semantics and not attacking the argument. Violent crime is violent crime. Stop playing semantics...

Semantics, I suppose only Dahunan knows for sure. Dahunan mentioned Knife/Gun, but didn't specify the Crime committed. I think he may have mentioned them in context with the thread, that being Theft. Dahunan didn't even bing up "violence", that too was Mill's "semantics". So maybe I'm playing Semantics or maybe I'm using Context.

Is using a gun or a knife to commit a crime not violent crime?

Maybe, maybe not, depends on the definition of "violent". Kinda moot though, whether it is or not, you(Mill) brought up Murder.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
The way I see it it that those who now comprise the alledged 'Leadership' of the Republican Party are betting the farm that they can complete the power grab and write enough new laws to excuse themselves for any wrong doing before the citizens can gather enough opposing voters to stop them. The are engaged upon using 'Fear' as a Psylogical Weapon upon those who are paranoid enough to belive thier rhetoric. Witness the useage of the insecure American male ego to fear the loss of his job 'IF' enough is not done to support Big Buisness. This Administration is trying to push through even more 'Special Deals' to the Corporate Elite - those who own the business that hire the worker that they can get the most out of for the least wage and compensation that they can. Millions in fundings to the Republicans to pass laws that only benifit thier companies and themselves, while using the threat of 'Outsourcing' or going 'Offshore' to placate those who would be stuck without an option of employment. How many jobs have been lost now ? More in their watch than an any other time in our history ? Who got the contracts ? Who gets to skate free of criminal prosecution for fraud ? Looks like a disaster is building up for our nation. Do you think that any of those who are doing this damage to our country will have to answer up for thier actions ? Looks like Standard Procedure Republican Politics to me.

I fear you may be right. Even more, I fear they may succeed.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Zebo
The whole republican philosophy is a lie. All they can hope for, in a democracy, is to give just enough benefit to the majority while benefiting thier real consitutants (the uber rich) as much as possible. Thats what you see by ruineness debt to benefit wealthy contractors for thier wares and t-bill holders, paltry middle class tax cuts and privitization of medicare benefit, while slashing capital gains, estate and top earners rates. Good thing though, with majority of military and law enforcement believing in the republican lie they may not have to deal with democracy any more and will simply move tward totalitarian dictatorship which is the governement type they support abroad in most all cases.

Likewise Zebo's comment.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Sounds right on target to me. One can only hope that more and more true conservatives continue to wake up to what has happened to the Republican party. Sooner or later, something has to give. Perhaps centrist Democrats can join with conservative Republicans, leaving the Republican party to the business whores and neo-facists.

That sure will thin down the herd here in AT P&N.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
As I've said before, the Bushies and their congressional allies aren't conservatives in any modern sense of the word. They're radical reactionaries, more akin to Republicans of the McKinley Era than anything else. It's not just a hands off attitude towards business, it's a "What can we do for you today, gentlemen? we have a special on logging and air pollution this week..." kind of attitude.

Last time I checked, Conservatives actually conserve, maintain the status quo and our national resources for future generation. Conservatives are also fiscally conservative. The Republican conservatives of my youth would be utterly appalled by the current state of the budget- Eisenhower, Goldwater, and all the rest would be vociferously denouncing these looters as traitors of the worst sort, crass and greedy economic opportunists at best.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Bosshawk1

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Bosshawk1

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: dahunan
I hope so... White Collar criminals think they aren't like those criminals who use a gun or knife..etc. NO.. they are WORSE.. The collapse of Enron hurt 1000's of American Middle Class families

But they aren't violent criminals??? What's your point? Steal enough money and it is a violent crime?

I think he explains it quite well. Look at Parmalat, they have been stealing for over 10 years and what was thought to be a solid investment 2 weeks ago turns out to be a virtual empty shell. This and Enron are insidious, no one knows what's happening until it's beyond too late.

Reminds me of the words of a great poet of our time:

"Steal a little they'll throw you in jail
Steal a lot and they'll make you King"

I'm still confused on how someone could say a property crime is worse than a violent crime. Because people lose money? A lot of people were a victim of Worldcom or Enron. I lost a nice chunk in Worldcom, and I agree those people should do some time, but they didn't murder me.

Dahunan didn't say Mudrer, you did. He was comparing Armed Robbers to White Collar criminals.

Huh? He said "Criminals" using a knife or a gun. How does that not fit a murderer as well. I think you are playing semantics and not attacking the argument. Violent crime is violent crime. Stop playing semantics...

Semantics, I suppose only Dahunan knows for sure. Dahunan mentioned Knife/Gun, but didn't specify the Crime committed. I think he may have mentioned them in context with the thread, that being Theft. Dahunan didn't even bing up "violence", that too was Mill's "semantics". So maybe I'm playing Semantics or maybe I'm using Context.

Is using a gun or a knife to commit a crime not violent crime?

Maybe, maybe not, depends on the definition of "violent". Kinda moot though, whether it is or not, you(Mill) brought up Murder.

Why do you keep playing semantics and dodging my argument. Now it depends on the definition of violent? Ok Bill...

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Bosshawk1
Is using a gun or a knife to commit a crime not violent crime?

Maybe, maybe not, depends on the definition of "violent". Kinda moot though, whether it is or not, you(Mill) brought up Murder.

Why do you keep playing semantics and dodging my argument. Now it depends on the definition of violent? Ok Bill...

Two points:

1. This debate has virtually nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

2. Please trim your damn quotes.

Thank you.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Bosshawk1

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Bosshawk1

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: dahunan
I hope so... White Collar criminals think they aren't like those criminals who use a gun or knife..etc. NO.. they are WORSE.. The collapse of Enron hurt 1000's of American Middle Class families

But they aren't violent criminals??? What's your point? Steal enough money and it is a violent crime?

I think he explains it quite well. Look at Parmalat, they have been stealing for over 10 years and what was thought to be a solid investment 2 weeks ago turns out to be a virtual empty shell. This and Enron are insidious, no one knows what's happening until it's beyond too late.

Reminds me of the words of a great poet of our time:

"Steal a little they'll throw you in jail
Steal a lot and they'll make you King"

I'm still confused on how someone could say a property crime is worse than a violent crime. Because people lose money? A lot of people were a victim of Worldcom or Enron. I lost a nice chunk in Worldcom, and I agree those people should do some time, but they didn't murder me.

Dahunan didn't say Mudrer, you did. He was comparing Armed Robbers to White Collar criminals.

Huh? He said "Criminals" using a knife or a gun. How does that not fit a murderer as well. I think you are playing semantics and not attacking the argument. Violent crime is violent crime. Stop playing semantics...

Semantics, I suppose only Dahunan knows for sure. Dahunan mentioned Knife/Gun, but didn't specify the Crime committed. I think he may have mentioned them in context with the thread, that being Theft. Dahunan didn't even bing up "violence", that too was Mill's "semantics". So maybe I'm playing Semantics or maybe I'm using Context.

Is using a gun or a knife to commit a crime not violent crime?

Maybe, maybe not, depends on the definition of "violent". Kinda moot though, whether it is or not, you(Mill) brought up Murder.

Why do you keep playing semantics and dodging my argument. Now it depends on the definition of violent? Ok Bill...

Who is dodging? Was Dahunan possibly just talking about Armed Robbery where a gun or knife might be used to coerce one into cooperation? Is that "Violent"? Not in my books, Murder certainly is violent or useage of the gun/knife to inflict injury is violent, but that's not what Dahunan(as far as I can see) was talking about.

 

[busmaster11]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Why is Kenneth Lay still a free man?

There's a long line at the Hague.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Who is dodging? Was Dahunan possibly just talking about Armed Robbery where a gun or knife might be used to coerce one into cooperation? Is that "Violent"? Not in my books, Murder certainly is violent or useage of the gun/knife to inflict injury is violent, but that's not what Dahunan(as far as I can see) was talking about.

You've GOT to be kidding me. You're saying Armed Robbery is not a violent crime? WTF? Find me ONE shred of evidence that agrees with you here. ONE. Do you even know what Violent Crime is? Violent crime *includes* any attempt to use a dangerous weapon or instrument in the commission of a crime. You might possibly be the only person on the North American continent that would say Armed Robbery is not a violent crime. It just further illustrates might point that you are unreasonable at best and a lying manipulator at worst. I'm not even going to waste any more time on you, but that just narrows down even more those who will respond to you. The number keeps shrinking.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: sandorski

Who is dodging? Was Dahunan possibly just talking about Armed Robbery where a gun or knife might be used to coerce one into cooperation? Is that "Violent"? Not in my books, Murder certainly is violent or useage of the gun/knife to inflict injury is violent, but that's not what Dahunan(as far as I can see) was talking about.

You've GOT to be kidding me. You're saying Armed Robbery is not a violent crime? WTF? Find me ONE shred of evidence that agrees with you here. ONE. Do you even know what Violent Crime is? Violent crime *includes* any attempt to use a dangerous weapon or instrument in the commission of a crime. You might possibly be the only person on the North American continent that would say Armed Robbery is not a violent crime. It just further illustrates might point that you are unreasonable at best and a lying manipulator at worst. I'm not even going to waste any more time on you, but that just narrows down even more those who will respond to you. The number keeps shrinking.

Exagerate much?