How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Iraq   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ]
 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Iraq

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


50 posted 06-24-2011 12:14 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Heard a lot of them was Irish.  That's even true.  Having come from Boston, I met a lot of them, but their reception was a lot different than the reception the non-native English speakers seem to get.  When I was last back to Boston, about a year or so ago, there wasn't a lot of rage about all those Irish folks, either.  There was even a fair amount of slack cut for the English speaking Canadians, though there wasn't an actual active underground supporting them.

     Most of the folks that I see the complaints about have been people of color and spanish speakers and Asians of one sort or another.

     Of course, you may have an entirely different experience, Mike.

     Up around Buffalo way, there was a fair amount of pressure on folks of obvious middle eastern origin, and I hear that around Detroit there some of the same sort of thing.

     What did you have in mind?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


51 posted 06-24-2011 01:02 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

No, I'm not speaking of personal experience, Bob. As I said there was a report with a chart published a year or so ago listing the nationalities of those crossing the southern borders illegally. I'll see if I can find it when I have the time..it was pretty eye-opening. I haven't heard that much of Irish illegal aliens...

I was referring to Ron's statement about latins and illegal aliens. Nice to see that you re-enforce my point referring to Asians.
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 05-19-99
Posts 9708
Michigan, US


52 posted 06-24-2011 04:12 AM       View Profile for Ron   Email Ron   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Ron's Home Page   View IP for Ron

quote:
I was referring to Ron's statement about latins and illegal aliens.

That statement was very much tongue in cheek, Mike. I recognize the semantic differences Denise apparently thinks are unimportant and agree the issue shouldn't be about race. Nor should the racial card be played just to point fingers, instill a false sense of guilt, or confuse the question.

My point wasn't to agree with Bob so much as it was to disagree with Denise. Semantics DO matter, and a mole hill isn't the same as a mountain. This ain't no mountain.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


53 posted 06-24-2011 11:21 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Isn't it interesting, though, how democrats pander to Latins before elections? One fifth of voting Texans are Latin. ONE THIRD of voting Californians are Latin. Throw in New Mexico, Arizona and the like and you have a very sizable amount of votes. The Democrats going after those votes IS racial.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


54 posted 06-24-2011 06:14 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

We'll have to agree to disagree, Ron. I think it is a very big deal when the Administration does an end run around Congress and the Constitution, whether it is done by Executive Order or bureaucratic memo, or policies enancted by the czars, to implement its agenda. It voids the checks and balances of our system.  A rose by any other name....
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


55 posted 06-24-2011 07:03 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     It certainly seems to be, Mike.  

     The question to my mind is twofold: Why would the Republicans feel that treating a racial group in an pejorative fashion should be excused at all, and why would the Democrats feel that there was any excuse at all to wait for some electoral advantage to accrue before acting.  Both seem to me to be basically racist positions worthy of criticism. Perhaps you have some reason to disagree.

     The fact that the Republicans are more unswerving in their position hardly seems a recommendation to me.  Perhaps you forget the efforts that our most recent President Bush went to court the Latins.  You may remember how basically off key much of his work was — at least in my opinion.  

     Why would you imagine Democrats wouldn't court the Latin vote as well?  And if you weren't a bit nervous about the possible accuracy of their appeal, why would you object?  If Republicans can attempt an appeal, why shouldn't Democrats?  If the Democrats going after Latino votes is racial, why isn't Republicans going after Latino votes Racial?

     I hadn't noted the limitation of the discussion of immigration to the Southern border until your last posting.  Did I miss something or what?  My understanding is that most illegal immigration came from folks who came in legally and overstayed their legal visas.  Am I incorrect in that understanding?

     I happen to have some sympathy with the notion of not making end runs around congress, especially on issues involving war and peace.

     I would also suggest that I would feel much better about the use of such  formulations about balances of the power of the branches of government when there was somewhat more attention being paid to the will of the majority and less attention being lavished on the need for legislation to require essentially a two thirds majority to get passed through the senate, for example.  Filibuster and the threat of filibuster has consequences, and the outrage on the minority side over the reaction of the majority in the Senate here seems a touch disingenuous.  Criticizing the Democrats for that reaction seems a logical move, mind you, but any authentic upset has got to be more that of amazement than anything else.  Why didn't the Democrats do this sooner?

    

    
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


56 posted 06-25-2011 02:20 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer


Why would the Republicans feel that treating a racial group in an pejorative fashion should be excused at all


I don’t know that they do, Bob. Is it your contention that they do/ If so, tell me why.

Why would you imagine Democrats wouldn't court the Latin vote as well?  And if you weren't a bit nervous about the possible accuracy of their appeal, why would you object?

No, I don’t imagine they wouldn’t court the Latin vote, nor does it make me nervous. I simply pointed out that they do…but only when elections are on the near horizon. They also have the same tactic with the black vote. Interestingly enough, when there is no election nearby, they do very little for these groups they court.

I hadn't noted the limitation of the discussion of immigration to the Southern border until your last posting.
Yes, Bob, I had been keying in on the illegal immigration flow that has been in the papers for the past couple of years,  the one that caused Arizona to pass laws to stem it, along with Texas, Oklahoma and others. Referring to the one that has shown crowds of illegals running through the desert in the middle of the night, the one that has shown discovered caches of weapons and drugs  I hadn't noted Irishmen with expired visas getting a lot of newspaper coverage, although you seem to feel that is an important issue.

My understanding is that most illegal immigration came from folks who came in legally and overstayed their legal visas.  Am I incorrect in that understanding?

Absolutely, unless you can show something to back up that understanding. Good luck with that.


Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


57 posted 06-27-2011 09:05 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


quote:

Why would the Republicans feel that treating a racial group in an pejorative fashion should be excused at all


I don’t know that they do, Bob. Is it your contention that they do/ If so, tell me why.




     Tell you why?  You and I have had this discussion before.  

     You were bitter  at the loss of law suits brought against the Republican party in several states, including Florida, Michigan and Ohio about its targeting of blacks for elimination from the voter roles for reasons that several different courts found racially biased and in violation of of the law..  That would be  a series of reasons.

     In  each case The party not only appeared to feel that such actions were defensible, but it in fact paid to have such actions defended and defended again on appeal.
     If it comforts you at all, I suggested that the Democrats were far to slack in their defense of minorities, and that racism was alive and well in both parties.


quote:

I hadn't noted the limitation of the discussion of immigration to the Southern border until your last posting.
Yes, Bob, I had been keying in on the illegal immigration flow that has been in the papers for the past couple of years,  the one that caused Arizona to pass laws to stem it, along with Texas, Oklahoma and others. Referring to the one that has shown crowds of illegals running through the desert in the middle of the night, the one that has shown discovered caches of weapons and drugs  I hadn't noted Irishmen with expired visas getting a lot of newspaper coverage, although you seem to feel that is an important issue.




     This discussion, which has been about Iraq, has actually drifted somewhat, Mike.  I’ve been having trouble following it.  My understanding is that Denise was upset about some perceived change in the the handling of immigration, and who was to be prosecuted for violations of immigration law.  

     You may be unaware that I was upset by being stopped by folks from Immigration and Customs  close to the Canadian border of three occasions while on a bus and asked about my citizenship and other matters.  While I do have a passport, I do not carry it about.  And while you have been keying on on the immigration flow of hispanic people from the south of the border for quite a while and how to protect us from them, you see, I have been considering that we are a nation of immigrants.  

     About this issue we have been talking past each other.

     I have seen films of caches of weapons and drugs all over the place.  The Mexicans have been complaining bitterly about the weapons smuggled across the border from the united states into Mexico for years.  I haven’t heard you complain, have I?  We have caches of weapons up here because they’re most likely bought up here.  And the drugs are capitalism run riot.  The war on drugs creates scarcity in the market., higher prices and brings more people into the thing on the supply end because there’s more money to be made.

     And of course you haven’t heard a lot about the Irish illegals.  I don’t think they’re a terribly important issue.  For the most part, they work hard and keep their heads down, same as most of the other illegals.

quote:

My understanding is that most illegal immigration came from folks who came in legally and overstayed their legal visas.  Am I incorrect in that understanding?

Absolutely, unless you can show something to back up that understanding. Good luck with that.



     I did some research to check out my assertion and I couldn’t find anything to back myself up.  It looks like I was wrong.  If I find out otherwise in the future, I’ll probably bring it back up and talk about what happened along the way; but right now, it looks like I was simply straight out wrong.  Sorry to be misleading.  I did think I was right.  Thanks for calling me on it.

    
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


58 posted 06-27-2011 11:34 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

And the drugs are capitalism run riot.

Not much I can say in response to that....since I'm speechless.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


59 posted 06-28-2011 07:25 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



    And that would be in what sense?

     Did you think that drugs were somehow exempt from the rules of supply and demand?  Did you think that morals and legal sanctions were somehow exempt from supply and demand as well?  Did you think that moral behavior didn't have and effect on economics?

     None of these ideas are new to you.  I've seen them discussed in these pages before, and I would assume you have too.  Is "speechless" a rhetorical position of some sort?  

     Of all the things I said above, why would you choose  to respond to one that you have heard discussed before as t5hough you were utterly unfamiliar with the concept?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


60 posted 06-28-2011 08:02 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Well, Bob, if drugs are capitalism run riot, then I must suppose that blackmail, kidnapping, arson, murder or any crime that is committed for profit is also capitalism run riot. Is that supposed to excuse it some way? Is that supposed to mean that capitalism is the cause of drug-running, that if there were no capitalism, there would be no drug trafficking? Your statement reads like if there were no capitalism, there would be no drug-running. Don't blame the drug king-pins - blame capitalists.

Speechless.....
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


61 posted 06-28-2011 08:09 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

  You were bitter  at the loss of law suits brought against the Republican party in several states, including Florida, Michigan and Ohio about its targeting of blacks for elimination from the voter roles for reasons that several different courts found racially biased and in violation of of the law..  That would be  a series of reasons.

Aside from the fact that you are once again labeling my feelings, like calling me bitter (quite a strong description), I don't even recall which lawsuits you are referring to. That doesn't mean you are in error, it may just mean my memory is not what it used to be and, since we have lost the ability to go way, way, back to check our comments, I don't suppose I will unless you feel like rehashing them.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


62 posted 06-28-2011 08:12 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

You may be unaware that I was upset by being stopped by folks from Immigration and Customs  close to the Canadian border of three occasions while on a bus and asked about my citizenship and other matters. It would be impossible to be unaware of it, since you have mentioned it on many occasions   While I do have a passport, I do not carry it about.  And while you have been keying on on the immigration flow of hispanic people from the south of the border for quite a while and how to protect us from them, you see, I have been considering that we are a nation of immigrants.

Actually, Bob, we are a nation of legal immigrants. There's a difference.  
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


63 posted 06-29-2011 02:31 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


quote:

     Is that supposed to excuse it some way? Is that supposed to mean that capitalism is the cause of drug-running, that if there were no capitalism, there would be no drug trafficking? Your statement reads like if there were no capitalism, there would be no drug-running. Don't blame the drug king-pins - blame capitalists.




     Have you done any reading on the dismal science, Mike?  It sounds as though you're talking more political rhetoric here than an understanding of the subject.  I don't claim to have a depth understanding, mind you, and I don't want to toss barbs, but drug king-pins are folks who operate according to the laws of economics as surely as you or I do.  I mean here market economics, the kind that you're used to talking about.  Labeling drug king-pins evil doesn't mean anything except that it makes the nature of the competition for the money more savage because the potential rewards are greater.

     There is trafficking even in legal drugs, and it tends to be highly profitable too.  Those companies that engage in it will often try to get profit margins like those for illegal drugs or even greater by manipulation of patent laws and by attempting to manipulate the market in other fashions.

     Some nations have tried with some success to undermine a portion of these practices and keep the availability of at least some drugs low and affordable.  The excess profits having gone out of them — in India, for example — smuggling and black markets have grown up in other areas, such as gold.

     Bayer has recently passed the 100th anniversary of two major drugs, both of considerable value to man and medicine, one celebrated, the other not.  Aspirin and Heroin.  I would be hard pressed to decide which has made more money over that time.  Both have been long time bestsellers, but the restrictions imposed on the sale of the heroin, limiting distribution and raising cost and profit may well have made it the winner.    
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


64 posted 06-29-2011 02:41 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



quote:

Actually, Bob, we are a nation of legal immigrants. There's a difference.  



     Please offer some documentation of that from neutral sourcing, if you can.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


65 posted 06-29-2011 03:05 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K




http://sandiego.indymedia.org/media/2007/02/125032.pdf


     Since your memory is faulty, you might try reading chapter one of this book, available for free at the site above, pages 6 to 44.  The research is excellent, and it goes over the basis for the suit that the Republicans later lost in Florida.  Perhaps you will find another adjective to explain the nature of your reactions to that loss, since I wouldn't want  to suggest that "bitter" had to be the one that felt accurate to you.  Clearly, I overstepped.

     The suits in Ohio and Michigan will probably be worth researching later, if we can find a way of discussing the Florida suit reasonably.  I think we should both probably be a bit careful with our tempers in approaching the material.  I know, at least, that I need to be cautious.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


66 posted 06-29-2011 07:24 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer


drug king-pins are folks who operate according to the laws of economics as surely as you or I do

I doubt that I care to be compared to drug king-pins in any meaningful way, Bob. BY your reasoning, then drug lords  are simply heads of corporations, like the thousands in America, trying to make a living. So was Capone.

Labeling drug king-pins evil doesn't mean anything except that it makes the nature of the competition for the money more savage because the potential rewards are greater.

So it is unfair to them to label drug king-pins as evil?


There is trafficking even in legal drugs, and it tends to be highly profitable too.

No doubt. How many dead bodies does this trafficking in legal drugs leave laying around, Bob? How many murders are committed in this legal drug trafficking? How many kidnappings?

Some nations have tried with some success to undermine a portion of these practices and keep the availability of at least some drugs low and affordable.

Which means what, exactly? If we were to legalize pot, heroin, cocaine, and all of the other drugs listed as illegal and make them affordable to all the illegal drug trafficking would die out? Well, you are probably right there. Is that how you want to life here to be? Shall E-Bay have a HEROIN day? Should Krogers advertise “buy one, get one free” on bales of pot? Should “Things go better with Coke” take on a new meaning?

Bob, I began by talking about the illegal drug-running,  with all attached to it, like the cartels and the tens of thousands of murders and felonies attached to it and you turn it into a talk about aspirin, the high cost of legal drugs and the drug lords, responsible for thousands of deaths, being entrepreneurs of a capitalistic system out making a few bucks like we all do. MY question to you would be the same question on thousands of bumper stickers these days……WHAT PART OF ILLEGAL DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND??.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


67 posted 06-29-2011 07:30 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Actually, Bob, we are a nation of legal immigrants. There's a difference.  ……..’Deer
________________________________________
Please offer some documentation of that from neutral sourcing, if you can……..Bob K



I’m confused, Bob. Documentation that we are a nation of legal immigrants or documentation that there is a difference between legal and illegal?


Brad
Member Ascendant
since 08-20-99
Posts 5896
Jejudo, South Korea


68 posted 06-29-2011 07:38 AM       View Profile for Brad   Email Brad   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Brad


quote:
I could argue that the protesters are different, the Egyptians, Libyans etc are good citizens fighting oppressive regimes and the Iraqi's are Muslim terrorists trying to derail the valiant efforts to build a democratic government. Unfortunately there's little evidence that those 'good/bad' labels are applicable, not to mention the danger of selective demonization based on a biased perspective - the enemy of my friend and all that jazz.

Are there any more valid reasons to ignore the events in one middle-eastern country while taking action against another?


I disagree that we should ignore this.  I agree that we shouldn't help. This is, and you can disagree with this, is their 1848.

It is the beginning of a new and better world.

And yes, it's going to take time.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


69 posted 06-29-2011 08:19 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Thank you for the link, Bob. I don’t know  how far you had to search to find such a biased, one-sided piece of liberal propaganda but you did well.

Your book seems to have a lot of supporters and dissenters. The supporters seem to all have a strong lean to the left (no surprise there), including that bastion of liberal litanies, Alan Coombs  of FOX. The dissenters?? Let’s see…

“Rubbish... rubbish.”
Official spokesman, World Trade Organization (WTO)

“Your (deleted) axe to grind with Bush is just another example of how far a punk  loser will go to slander our president.”
(Signed) “A Real American.”

“To Americans who cannot read his stories printed in Britain’s Observer, he is America’s journalist hero of the Internet.”
Alan Colmes, Fox Television


“[Palast’s reports) have not one shred of evidence!”
Prime Minister Tony Blair
Your author, the reporter for the Guardian and Observer in Britain, seemed to have bad luck getting the American news  agencies interested. I refer to comments like…

But no news editors or news producers called me (except the CBS Network News producer who ran away with tail tucked as soon as Governor Jeb denied the allegations).

….and


One problem: I had not quite completed my own investigation on this matter. Therefore, CBS would have to do some actual work, reviewing documents and law, obtaining statements. The next day I received a call from the producer who said, “I’m sorry, but your story didn’t hold up.” Well, how did the multibillion dollar CBS network determine this? Answer: “We called Jeb Bush’s office.” Oh. And that was it.

So the fellow is insinuating that his figures didn’t hold up because the mainsteam news agencies simply ran way when Jeb Bush denied them. Who is kidding who here? The mainsteam media has always been left, as you well know. A Bush denial would stop them from such amazing allegations which could affect the presidential election? Highly unlikely, sir.

The fellow comes across as a whining, cry baby that no one would pay attention to so he produced this to slam the Bush administration. Doesn’t seem like it got a lot of play in the US, did it? At least I’ve never heard of it. Could that be because people, even liberals, could see it for what it really was? It would be easy to write an article like that about how the US pulled off 9/11, how Kennedy was shot by a Republican  sharp-shooter in league with Russia, or how it was actually the raven that killed Cock Robin. Were his facts valid? I don’t know but apparently the news agencies he tried to get interested in them didn’t think  so.


I’ll say it one more time…..Gore lost the election because he could not carry his own state. The people who knew him best voted against him. Had they not, Florida would not have even mattered.

I will say that, seeing Gore’s actions of the past few years…thank God he didn’t win!
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


70 posted 06-29-2011 11:52 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



quote:

drug king-pins are folks who operate according to the laws of economics as surely as you or I do

I doubt that I care to be compared to drug king-pins in any meaningful way, Bob. BY your reasoning, then drug lords  are simply heads of corporations, like the thousands in America, trying to make a living. So was Capone.



     "I doubt that I care to be compared to drug king-pins in any meaningful way, Bob."

     Your objection is moral, perhaps?  Since you don't specify, I can't tell, and you are clear I shouldn't go beyond your actual statements.

     The fact that an enterprise is criminal doesn't mean that it doesn't operate by economic principles.  If Capone lost money, he would have gone out of business, same as you.  He sought to maximize profit and minimize risk, same as you.  The fact that his enterprise was illegal didn't mean that it was free from the laws of Capitalism, Mike.  Adam Smith didn't say that he was only formulating laws that legally sanctioned businesses would follow.  Nor did Karl Marx.  Nor did Samuelson; nor any of the current crop of Laissez-faire capitalists.

     Capitalism is about the rules that seem to regulate the movement of capital and how it's used from the point of view of the entrepreneur.  Marxism and socialism try to look at the same economic movements from the point of view of labor and how it affects the movements of money and skills.  It's all economics.  The issue of legality is a different set of priorities.  When I.G.Farben was producing various manufacturing products in Germany during the thirties and forties, including many chemical products, their eye was primarily on the bottom line.  They concerned themselves with the economics.  The fact that they were using slave labor for their production was an economic issue to them, and it seemed a useful was to go though many would find it abhorrent in afterthought.  Being a permitted thing to do, they did it and profited from doing so.

     Pelikan, one of my favorite pen manufacturers, got the contract for the production of ink for the third reich, and made a good chunk of change from that contract.  It was used to tattoo prisoners in many of the concentration camps, according to my friend Norman, who after many years — on finding out this piece of information — refused to use a pen I'd given him, a lovely Pelikan fountain pen.

     Morality and Economics do not always eat from the same trough.  Should they?  I'd say yes, but then I'd have to stop buying oil, when I examine the way some oil companies treat indigenous peoples in both Africa and South America,. for example. The drug Lords are simply the heads of proto-corporations.

{quote]
Labeling drug king-pins evil doesn't mean anything except that it makes the nature of the competition for the money more savage because the potential rewards are greater.

So it is unfair to them to label drug king-pins as evil?
[/quote]

     Certainly not.

     You've also heard me speak about the heads of some other corporations as evil from time to time.

quote:
    
There is trafficking even in legal drugs, and it tends to be highly profitable too.

No doubt. How many dead bodies does this trafficking in legal drugs leave laying around, Bob? How many murders are committed in this legal drug trafficking? How many kidnappings?



     Do you blame these murders on the drugs themselves or the laws that make dealing in these drugs so profitable?

     I would say that it is the laws themselves that make the murders likely, and that one should fault the lawmakers for creating the conditions where the competition is so extreme that people are willing to kill for the profits for the deaths and the kidnappings.

     Do you see a lot of murders and kidnappings among the farmers who raise the poppies where the raw materials are easily available for those who need them for relief of pain?  You'd have to demonstrate to me a similar rate of murder there to suggest that the cause of the murders was the drug itself and not the unreasonability of the law.

quote:

Some nations have tried with some success to undermine a portion of these practices and keep the availability of at least some drugs low and affordable.

Which means what, exactly? If we were to legalize pot, heroin, cocaine, and all of the other drugs listed as illegal and make them affordable to all the illegal drug trafficking would die out? Well, you are probably right there. Is that how you want to life here to be?



     Perhaps you know the way I should live my life better than I do, is that what you're suggesting?  What if I know the way you should live your life better than the way you think you do?  Is that Okay with you?

     Give me a break.

quote:

Shall E-Bay have a HEROIN day? Should Krogers advertise “buy one, get one free” on bales of pot? Should “Things go better with Coke” take on a new meaning?



     I admire the rhetoric, but don't see anybody proposing your suggestions but you.  

     Given the advertising culture, I don't see it as impossible.  Perhaps you would limit people's freedom to do so?  Seems like you are very much in favor of having people live the kind of life you prescribe at the expense of their own rights to determine their own notions of the sort of life they should lead.  That should not be the American way, I suspect, everybody free to live their life the way Mike wants it to be; and I don't think that you'd really want that for everybody.  I don't think you fought for that.  I think you'd be insulted at the very suggestion, though I may be wrong.

quote:

Bob, I began by talking about the illegal drug-running,  with all attached to it, like the cartels and the tens of thousands of murders and felonies attached to it and you turn it into a talk about aspirin, the high cost of legal drugs and the drug lords, responsible for thousands of deaths, being entrepreneurs of a capitalistic system out making a few bucks like we all do. MY question to you would be the same question on thousands of bumper stickers these days……WHAT PART OF ILLEGAL DON’T YOU UNDERSTAND??.



     Fair enough.

     I don't understand the part about illegal where it turns out to be in somebody's economic interest that a specific thing be illegal.  Like the part where it turned out that Marijuana is basically a benign drug with some basic medical uses that was put on the controlled drug list for bogus  reasons almost a hundred years ago despite some decent research by Harvard researchers going back almost fifty years.

     Yeah, I've seen it abused — by people who could abuse air and water, myself included on occasion, but its reputation as a gateway drug — and the whole concept of a gateway drug itself — is bogus.  Almost everybody who ended up as a heroin abuser, for example, ate bread or drank milk, and everybody breathed.  The concept would suggest that milk, bread and air were all gateway experiences for heroin addiction.  Need I mention vitamin pills or sugar?

     Clothes are an almost certain predictor of heroin use and a 100% predictor of cancer and heart disease.  So is food.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


71 posted 06-30-2011 12:20 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Perhaps you should check where the material was published and what is contained in the material before you start quoting tongue-in-cheek promotional material as though it were serious, Mike. You might find this a protection against looking foolish.  I would hope so.  Mr. Palast has studied with the most conservative of conservative economists at The University of Chicago.  He understands them as well or more likely better than you do, having done graduate wok with them.  He has published articles critical of President Clinton, and is frequently critical of folks on the left.

     The fact that he is critical of the Florida Republicans and their activities in this article appears still to be a mystery to you.  I notice that you have made no note of any of the points he made, and of the facts he raised and documented, and seek to get people to set aside his article without thinking about it and above all without reading it.

     If in fact you have read it, I suggest that you respond to the facts of what he says rather than making an ad hominim attack on the man without apparently being aware of what he's said, and assuming that because you think he is liberal that the facts are undocumented.  They are well documented.  The Republicans lost the law suit about their illegal attempt to throw people off the voter roles in Florida, and this is not the only state in which such suits were supported by the courts.

     The fact that you have attacked the presentation of some of the facts simply means that you are less objective than the courts, or are less willing to understand the issues than they are.  I suggest that you are blocking out information that describes legal reality simply because you make a political judgement about it.  Political reality doesn't have to be pleasant or comply with your notion of what political reality ought to be.

     I have found political reality to be considerably more conservative than my own personal preferences would have it be much of the time.  So what?  I still need to know what the law is and how it functions well enough to get along in this society, as the police officer will be only too happy to inform me about things as basic as speed limits and stop signs.  Perhaps things in Florida are different.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


72 posted 06-30-2011 01:16 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Do you blame these murders on the drugs themselves or the laws that make dealing in these drugs so profitable?

Actually, I blame the murders on the murderers, Bob.

You've also heard me speak about the heads of some other corporations as evil from time to time.

Ok, I have it. The drug lords who smuggle drugs into the US so that addicts can get their fixes and their,er, employees can drum up new customers, like schoolkids, those drug lords who murder, rob and kidnap to achieve their goals are basically not much different than certain corporate heads, since you use them both in the same sentence to prove your point. Sorry to leave it there but I find this debate, or whatever it is, way too far out there to make any sense to me.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


73 posted 06-30-2011 01:22 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

in fact you have read it, I suggest that you respond to the facts of what he says rather than making an ad hominim attack on the man without apparently being aware of what he's said, and assuming that because you think he is liberal that the facts are undocumented.  They are well documented.

I have no idea if the facts are undocumented or not. I can't know unless I do the same research that he did. What I do know, and what I said, was that the major news agencies that he presented his documents to chose not to use them. That is what I know to be factual, since he acknowledged it.
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


74 posted 06-30-2011 07:13 PM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K


quote:

You've also heard me speak about the heads of some other corporations as evil from time to time.

Ok, I have it. The drug lords who smuggle drugs into the US so that addicts can get their fixes and their,er, employees can drum up new customers, like schoolkids, those drug lords who murder, rob and kidnap to achieve their goals are basically not much different than certain corporate heads, since you use them both in the same sentence to prove your point. Sorry to leave it there but I find this debate, or whatever it is, way too far out there to make any sense to me.



     Perhaps I have not been specific enough for you to follow.  Brown & Williamson and just about any other tobacco company you would care to mention are collectively marketing products that significantly raise the mortality rate in this country on a yearly basis.  Next to the mortality rates of these companies generate from the active marketing of their products, historically at least to children as well as to adults, and certainly to minorities, the complaints you raise about  illegal drugs are small, including the deaths and kidnappings.

     While one out of ten Americans has alcohol problems, we do not have the gun violence and kidnappings and crime related to that particular drug that we did have during the time when it was illegal.  We did have some of the same problems during alcohol prohibition that we have now during our drug prohibition, that of overdoses and poisonings, for example from the consumption of poisoned and unregulated product.  That was a problem with lack of regulation of production and lack of quality control and a function of an unregulated market:  Capitalism run amok; enterprise gone rogue.  

     If over-regulation is one tail of the bell-curve, then unregulated criminal behavior is the other.  That's my opinion.  Economies work better toward the middle of the curve, less stifled, better mannered, and complaints coming in from people on both sides with little real justification on either end.  That's an extension of my opinion.

     It is not too much of a stretch to see that the number of fatalities from tobacco exceeds that of the number of fatalities from Heroin, cocaine and Marijuana use, since tobacco use accounts for a large number of the deaths from cancer, Heart disease, and lung disease.

     I am not even including the alcoholic beverage industry, since I think that we are at least regulating it with some success and are putting at least some of those monies into treatment and rehab, if only a small amount of them.

     If this is too far out there to make any sense to you, I would suggest that is because of no fault in yourself but because of a flaw in the policy.  It makes absolutely no sense to keep these drugs illegal because it encourages crime, which is not something we want to do.  It makes treatment difficult, which is not useful.  It kills people because it makes it profitable to cut drugs with drain cleaner and strychnine as well as powdered milk and lactase and things that are not sterile and can cause infections.

     The fault isn't in you here, Mike, it's the policy that makes no sense.  It produces exactly the opposite the effect that the lawmakers say they intended.  To make it worse, when confronted with the failure of the policy, their solution is to do more of the same thing, running up the cost and refusing to acknowledge the need to understand what went wrong.

     What's so hard to understand about that?

    
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Iraq   [ Page: 1  2  3  4  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors