Local Posts #47

2009-11-28 04:21:00

  

Oct 12, 2009 -- Post #1

JJ:

I agree with Mr Rose. If we fight the Afghan war the way LBJ [USA President Lyndon B. Johnson] did Vietnam it will just drag on, cause many deaths of U.S. soldiers and end up being all for nothing.

We either need to dig in and fight to win in Afghanistan or get out.

Thanks to Bush and his daring surge it's quite possible we can soon begin withdrawing from Iraq and may have extra troops to place elsewhere.

  

Oct 12, 2009 -- Post #2

"Boiseriver":

"Let's get the history of the surge correct - it was not just an increase in troops. The folks in Anbar Province grew weary of the insurgents and switched sides. The U.S. also paid millions of dollars in bribes to stop fighting."

JJ:

That was all part of Bush's master plan.

  

"Badnana" wrote:

"Bush's master plan...hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha oh I cant stop! That's funny, I don't care who you are, that's funny! Even conservatives know Bush had NO plans, except to win the next election."

  

Oct 12, 2009 -- Post #3

"Boiseriver":

"How do we win in Afghanistan? What is it we would win? Why do you think that neither the British nor the Soviets could win in this country?"

JJ:

"Whatrwetalkingabout" gave a synopsis that gives a good picture. Sounds like Obama made a good choice in a general. Now will he support him?

  

Oct 12, 2009 -- Post #4

"Twall":

"Nothing to say when a conservative wants to end two people's freedom of speech Joseph [JJ]?"

JJ:

I wasn't aware that voicing your opinion about a writer was taking away free speech. I thought it was free speech. Do you think Lefties are taking away freedom of speech when they say they want Hoffman (a local writer) replaced with a liberal?

  

Oct 12, 2009 -- Post #5

"Bluegila55":

"Why are 'Starched Collars' who've never been bloodied in a fight, (like you two) so anxious to send in our boys to die?"

JJ:

This assumption speaks volumes about you when "Whatwearetalkingabout" has metal in his body from his service. I was called in during Vietnam and responded but was rejected because of an injury. Have you been in combat? If no, then according to your logic you have no right to even argue with "Whatwearetalkingabout." On the other hand, I think he realizes he fought for my freedom to give opinions on the military or any other item in which I do not have direct experience.

To desire to avoid indecision as we had in Vietnam is to save lives not cost lives.

To Lefties the mere existence of life, no matter how suppressed, is to be preserved at all costs. To me life is not worth a lot without freedom. Many are willing to give or risk their lives to preserve this most important possession.

  

Oct 12, 2009 -- Post #6

"Twall":

"You bet I think it is Joseph [JJ], but it is repression of free speech in this case because he wants them fired."

JJ:

Then you ought to be bellyaching about the Left because they work tirelessly to get Rush, Beck, Hannity, Coulter, and Savage fired and Fox shut down. Rarely do you see a conservative working to get anyone fired or shut down. I mean who out there is taking down Olberman's every word and attempting to get him off the air by publicizing his many indiscretions and contacting his advertisers?

  

Oct 12, 2009 -- Post #7

"Bluegila55" wrote:

"Master Plan? Wow, do you really believe that?"

JJ:

I thought that would get a rise out of some of you. On the other hand, Bush was a lot smarter than assumed by those who get their news from late night comics. He was a good strategist, as the surge demonstrated. He also far exceeded critics expectations in the initial wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

  

"Bluegila55":

"You're willing to kill for your ideals and your way?"

JJ:

What were you doing in the military if you were not willing to kill for your ideals? Were you a cook?

  

"Bluegila55":

"Is that why you support killing Womens Health Providers?"

JJ:

So you can't legitimately argue with me so you make up some hate speech.

Sad...

  

Oct 12, 2009 -- Post #8

"Tsparks" wrote:

"Question Joey [JJ]: what was the strategic brilliance of going to Iraq in the first place? I'm impressed that you can find some bright spots in what will probably go down in history as the biggest screw up by any president, ever."

JJ:

First to show that a dictator cannot defy U.N. resolutions forever. Second to free 31,000,000 people from a tyrant. Third to establish a democracy in the Middle East that others will eventually emulate. History will judge Bush more kindly than it will Obama when everything is said and done.

  

Oct 12, 2009 -- Post #9

"Bulegila55" wrote:

"You refuse to discuss the lawsuit Faux had about lying."

JJ:

What's there to discuss outside the fact you have to go back to 1996 to find something big mean Fox [News] did wrong? None of the media are perfect, but Fox is one of the best.

  

"55" wrote:

"Who do you think got Phil Maher fired from ABC?"

JJ:

That's Bill Maher. It was outraged fans.

  

"55" wrote:

"Who had the 'Dixi Chicks' black-balled because of their discussion about GWB [George W. Bush]?"

JJ:

Outraged fans exercising freedom of speech.

  

"55" wrote:

"The Faux parrots are unpatriotic, traitors, and liars."

JJ:

Again we see a lack of ability to articulate an argument or bring up actual facts so you just lash out. How depressing it must be to have such a mindset.

  

Oct 13, 2009 -- Post #1

"Proletariat" wrote:

"Why jump on repressive dictatorships?"

JJ:

Because capitalism can only be suppressed through taking away freedom and can only be prevented in a tyranny. Where you take it away the people starve.

China is growing economically because it is allowing its people to embrace capitalism. If chairman Mao was still in charge we wouldn't be seeing this.

  

"Proletariat" wrote:

"We have 45,000 people a year who die because they lack health insurance."

JJ:

That's a liberal estimate with no science behind it. However, 200,000 a year die because of medical mistakes. How many people then have their lives saved because they do not go to the doctor? Maybe 47,000.

We have children who go to bed hungry.

Not many due to food stamps, school lunches, welfare, foodbanks, charities, etc.

  

"Proletariat" wrote:

"Capitalism does not serve this country well."

JJ:

No system is perfect because humans are not perfect but the richest populaces are those that have the greatest freedom to practice capitalism.

  

Oct 14, 2009 -- Post #1

JJ:

I get frustrated with both parties also but that doesn't mean we want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Let's face it, for the foreseeable future these two parties will be the source of almost all of our politicians. To write them off is to write yourself out of the political process.

It is also unwise to support a third party. When you get too many parties the danger of getting an extremist elected increases. Hitler gained power in such a situation with only about a third of the vote. He could have not been a threat in a two party system.

The two party system is not perfect, but instead of abandoning it to the power hungry, the good guys need to participate in them to make the necessary changes to set them on a constructive path. In doing this we will find a few allies for there are good people in both parties.

  

Oct 14, 2009 -- Post #2

Concerning Mormons and [California's] Proposition 8, "Bulegila55" wrote :

"But black voters aren't a money-soaked, monolithic, corporatized, sanctimonious monstrosity that poured $20 million into the effort, are they?"

JJ:

Repeating hearsay again are we?

Mormons [LDS] make up less than 2% of the entire population of California.

According to California's official contribution database the total amount contributed on both sides to Prop 8 was about $103 million. The final statements of funds FOR Prop 8 totaled $41.3 million and those funds AGAINST Prop 8 totaled $61.6 million.

There is no reliable basis for any claim about how many of those contributions were made by LDS, since the religious affiliation of contributors is not recorded.

Approximately 90% of the funds FOR Prop 8 came from California residents.

The LDS church DID NOT make any large monetary contribution supporting Prop 8. Its in-kind contributions, required by law to be reported separately in California, were for $190,000.

The $20 million figure from "Bulegile55" is fabricated.

  

Oct 16, 2009 -- Post #1

JJ:

I delivered our babies at home and the cost was virtually zero. It is not rocket science to do this and the risk need be no more than a hospital birth. Not only that but there were other benefits. Each of my wife's labors were over 24 hours and the babies were large, one weighing 13.5 lbs. Most doctors would have performed cesareans, or rushed the delivery and caused tearing to the mother and trauma to the baby. We took our time and delivered them with no tearing or trauma.

In addition we made sure all the cord blood was transferred to the baby before the cord was cut. In the hospital the cord is often cut early and the baby misses out on the super nourishing blood that aids it in resisting disease later on.

Overall we not only saved a small fortune but our babies got off to a healthy start. It's also a thrill as a father to be the first to hold that new life in my hands.

  

Oct 16, 2009 -- Post #2

"Zekenaja" wrote:

"I have a friend who was in labor for almost 18 hours before they determined the baby was held up in the delivery canal with the baby stopped against a pelvic bone. They then did the C-Section. She and the baby would have both likely died without the C-Section."

JJ:

A handful of women have too small of pelvic area to give birth. If this was the case it was negligent on part of the doctor to not know this ahead of time and should have planned a C-Section to begin with. Most likely the baby was just turned wrong and if this was the case, then this was easy to correct. We had this problem with one of our babies and I just followed the instructions in a manual and turned the baby myself and the birth proceeded without problems. The doctor was probably blowing smoke to make your friend think the C-Section was essential. Most of them are not.

  

Oct 16, 2009 -- Post #3

"Crikey" wrote:

"All very groovy and nice. Until something goes haywire. Our friend and her baby both almost died because of a midwife not knowing when things were out of her control. After they finally got to the delivery room, the midwife kept blabbing about what needed to be done. Finally the female (real) doctor said 'Get out of my delivery room'."

JJ:

Yeah, many doctors are very intimidated by home births for it challenges their authority.

Most people are less than ten minutes away from a hospital and if something goes wrong that the midwife, or couple, cannot handle then you can just take the mother and baby to the hospital. Nurses assisting in delivery often have to wait a significant time anyway for a doctor to assist, even in a hospital.

"Crikey" is an English phrase. If you are English I'm surprised you aren't supportive of home births which are more popular there.