“‘So President George W. Bush listens to an iPod,’ began another pointless space-filler in the [New York] Sunday Times, ‘….How uncool is that?’ For the record, President Bush was spared both the ‘nerd’ label, as well as the unfortunate ‘spaz’ classification,” Isaiah Z. Sterrett writes for Men’s News Daily. “‘If someone as mainstream as President Bush has caught on to something allegedly so hip, what can Apple do to keep iPod chic and cutting edge?’ (That was the first time in recorded history that the New York Times was caught calling Bush ‘mainstream.’ Would that Miguel Estrada had jogged with an iPod.) ‘Apple promotes the iPod…with a counterculture package of freewheeling dancers, psychedelic coloring and raucous music. The company’s devotees are almost as fanatical as the Deadheads who followed the Grateful Dead on tour.’ (For future reference, a Deadhead is by definition someone who followed the Grateful Dead on tour.) ‘With simple styling and an easy-to-use format, it is little surprise that even the president has stumbled upon the iPod. Apple has a daunting 75 percent of the digital music player market, dominating companies like Dell and Samsung.'”
“Puzzlingly, it was just last month that the Times was pointing out how frequently iPods are stolen on the Subway. If they’re so uncool, why do they attract thieves? Reflect on the fact that no one is stealing Molly Ivins’ new book,” Sterrett writes. “Also last month, we learned that Apple Computer did fabulously well in the second fiscal quarter, beating even its own expectations. As of Tuesday afternoon, iPods or iPod accessories accounted for nearly 20% of Amazon.com’s top-selling electronics. We must ask: if Apple products were so unfashionable, why are people buying them?”
Full article here.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Rush Limbaugh says ‘Mac OS X Tiger Rocks,’ posts link to free Rush advertisement for Mac – April 30, 2005
President Bush’s use of iPod a lucky or bad break for Apple Computer? – April 18, 2005
President Bush’s Apple iPod features eclectic list of downloaded tunes – April 11, 2005
Die Welt: U.S President George Bush is ‘the Steve Jobs of World Politics’ – February 25, 2005
What’s on U.S. President Bush’s Apple iPod? – February 23, 2005
The Hill: Put Rush Limbaugh on Apple’s board of directors; he could sell tons of Macs – January 26, 2005
U.S. President George Bush a confirmed Apple iPod user (images included) – December 22, 2004
Rush Limbaugh calls for Apple iCal to Sidekick solution – November 12, 2004
President Bush, candidate Kerry both use Apple PowerBooks – July 14, 2004
Baltimore Sun: Vice President Dick Cheney a confirmed Apple iPod user – April 01, 2004
The Mac is Bush to Windows’ Clinton – October 25, 2002
Apple CEO Steve Jobs: ‘I’m going to just stay away from all that political stuff’ – August 25, 2004
Rush Limbaugh: Why does Apple put politics first? – June 27, 2003
Rush Limbaugh comments on Gored Apple – March 21, 2003
It is impossible to try an politicize the iPod, Macs or Apple. Big Fat Idiot Rush is a MacUser. He even talks about it on his radio show.
But other notable MacUsers include Al Gore and Dustin Hoffman. Not the most right-wing guys. Go figure.
Wow, what a piece of shit article. MDN, you have enough quality material to work with. Quit referencing crappy articles like this one and keep to the writers that have a bit of talent.
MDN generating hits for MND, on a topic guaranteeing hits for MDN…..
Suspicious?
Let the culture wars begin anew…Thanks, MDN…
wha? and the point of this article is?
Jimbo::
This site is called MAC DAILY NEWS! I believe the intent is to post ALL Mac related news stories possible… and yes. the above article whether you like it or not IS Mac related. It is up to the readers to decide what they will or will not read.. In other words, stop complaining!!
>But other notable MacUsers include commy pinkoes, Al Gore and Dustin Hoffman.>
Clinton’s iPod probably vibrates.
‘Nuff said.
Yeh-heh-hessssssss Liberals should crawl back into my poop
Why post this MDN?
Totally off topic I found this little gem while researching for something else. I thought I might share this with everyone.
“As democracy is perfected, the office of President represents, more and more closely, the inner soul of the people. On some great and glorious day the plain folks of the land will reach their heart’s desire at last and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron.”
So wrote H.L. Mencken (1880-1956), the acerbic American journalist and critic rightly known in his day as the Sage of Baltimore. I thank the Herald reader who reminded me of the quote for, with the re-election of George Bush, we can safely assume that Mencken’s great and glorious day has arrived. In spades.
Sara.
Here are your morons.
DEM CONGRESSMEN: CONSERVATIVE VOICES ON PBS MAY BE ILLEGAL
Two congressional Democrats called Wednesday for an investigation into recent activities by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, suggesting that efforts by the Republican chairman of the private nonprofit to add more conservative programs onto PBS may violate federal law.
In a letter released Wednesday evening, Rep. David Obey, D-Wis., and Rep. John D. Dingell, D-Mich., asked CPB Inspector General Kenneth A. Konz to investigate the contracting, hiring and policies of the corporation, which distributes federal funds to public television stations. Both congressmen are ranking Democrats on committees that have oversight of public television.
They called recent actions taken by CPB Chairman Kenneth Tomlinson “disturbing” and “extremely troubling.”
A CPB spokesman could not be reached for comment. But in a recent interview with the LOS ANGELES TIMES, Tomlinson defended his efforts to expand conservative perspectives on PBS, saying he merely wants to increase the network’s audience.
Fair & Balanced.
Sara, Mencken was paid to write, and truly his opinion can be found on every side of any issue. He was also an alcoholic and miserable, not surprisingly unable to keep friends without buying them. He may have been at his lowest when he wrote:
“The educated Negro of today is a failure, not because he meets insuperable difficulties in life, but because he is a Negro. His brain is not fitted for the higher forms of mental effort; his ideals, no matter how laboriously he is trained and sheltered, remain those of a clown.”.
Nice, eh? Do you buy into to that as well or are you the sort who cherry picks the quotes of intellectuals as they suit you?
btw, Mencken’s moron quote was printed way back in 1920, when Harding and Cox were battling it out. There is no way he could have imagined Hillary then.
And let the flames begin!
And since we’re throwing quote around, here’s one that’s more iPod-related than politically motivated:
“Music expresses that which cannot be said and on which it is impossible to be silent.” – Victor Hugo
Obey, Dingell & Konz. Our future!
Don’t you just love it?
Who really gives a sh*t? Liberals don’t have a corner on the “hipness” market like they seem to think they do. It’s just more childish games as usual. Some people really need to get a life. There are just as many conservatives that use iPods and Macs as there are liberals, so what’s the point of having such a stupid argument in the first place…
Conservatives don’t have a corner on morons either. We have a liberal moron in charge of running Canada into the ground right now.
Sam, I disagree. If I wrote an article on my web site, MDN would not be obliged to quote or reprint it. I’m sure that MDN culls over many articles each day that they do not print. This artcile was poorly written and was just plain stupid. Why print it?
I love my Mac … I love my iPod. I am conservative.
It does not matter your politics, you can recognize cool stuff. I do not fault Apple for the fact that it’s management is by and large, very liberal. I use the products because they are good. I do not buy anything becuse of the companies politics.
But since the can of worms has been opened:
What is hip? The Times seems to equate Hip with liberal. At times it has been hip to be liberal, but I am not sure that is the case anymore. Does hip have to do with popularity? Well, the polls tell us that conservative is slightly more popular than liberal. Does hip more have to do with trendy? Again the recent trend has been to be conservative – republicans have increased thir hold on power in every election in the last few years. (Bill Clinton not withstanding – he ran claiming to be a new democrat, and won primarily because Perot took mainly from the right).
Or does hip mean trendy with the young? In this case the Times argument may hold true as the young are still more liberal that society as a whole. of course they are more conservative than the youth of the past, so even here the conservatives may be the more “hip” group.
Of course the alternative definition of hip might be, not yet popular but soon to be. The the iPod is no longer hip, and we never recognize hip till it has passed. iPods are now the mainstream, and it is better to be “formorly hip.”
Of course this is all folly, because what really matters is that Apple has produced such a wonderful product that it has moved beyond the hip and chic set and appeals to everyone. I hope OS X does the same thing, it is becomming hip now, perhaps in two years it will be mainstream.
It seems that conservatives and liberals can share the love of good technologies! So lets take a break from the bickering and listen to our iPods … “think different” and make the world a better place.
Joe:
I know who Mencken was but also people fail to understand that he was a product of his times. In his time the KKK had more than 15 million members which was disgusting then as now, but a lot of people supported it that wouldn’t be possible today. Thank God that times have changed (or is it the same but different in more subtle ways). Look at our treatment of people with differing views (left or right) or people of differing religions ( Christian or Muslim). As for cherry-picking everyone does even you Joe going by your previous posts.
The New York Times should stick to what it does best: supporting pointless, criminally-motivated “wars” and praising dumb-ass moron pretenders to the throne.
Joe:
I like your Hillary quote, it seems you have a sense of humour. My first post wasn’t intended to be serious even if it was sardonic like yours.
I’m as right wing as they come (OK, maybe that’s a slight exaggeration–I think Ann Coulter is full of cr*p), but I love my Mac and my iPod.
This was just typical BS from the NYTimes. They can’t just agree to disagree with conservatives, they have to boost their egos by telling themselves they’re hipper/smarter/better/etc. How pathetic.
Regardless of SJ’s personal politics, Apple products are not political. SOME things SHOULD be non-political.
What gets me a bout an article like this is that it’s written by a racist. Why not have an article explaining why “Whitey’s” and “Crackers” use iPods and thereby make them not cool. Or perhaps we can target the “Jews”. I mean we all know the Jews are just a greedy group of people intent on dominating our media, right? Shit, maybe its the “towel-heads” or the “niggers”. But for now, I suppose writing “liberals” will do along with a whole shit-load of misconceived hate for them.
from the article: Liberals, alas, have a habit of telling consumers what to like and dislike. Liberals like capitalism only when it involves buying the things they like, such as both of the products made in France.
(MISINFORMATION AND HATE)
When consumers decide for themselves what to buy, Western liberals become strict Marxists.
(MISINFORMATION AND HATE)
What’s strange is that iPods, innocuous creatures as they are, have become the subject of leftist rage.
(MISINFORMATION AND HATE)
Someone really should tell these Democrats that, in just one of the hand-held devices, they could store all of their old Barbra Streisand albums—not to mention various hilarious clips from Air America.
(MISINFORMATION AND HATE)
MDN stop pushing politics on your site. We all know that you are a right winger already so GET OVER IT…..
Ok sara, peace on.
Regarding Jimbo’s comment:
“”Sam, I disagree. If I wrote an article on my web site, MDN would not be obliged to quote or reprint it. I’m sure that MDN culls over many articles each day that they do not print. This artcile was poorly written and was just plain stupid. Why print it?””
Sam, I think the difference is that the above article was pulled from a regualr news site.. Not someone’s personal blog.
Uhh. Correction.. My comment above was directed at Jimbo… Not myself!
I thought the article was right on the money..
RE: G Spank
First let me state that I did not actually read the article only the quote on MDN.
Your “racist” points and my responses are below:
from the article: Liberals, alas, have a habit of telling consumers what to like and dislike. Liberals like capitalism only when it involves buying the things they like, such as both of the products made in France.
(MISINFORMATION AND HATE)
Is this misinformation? They tell me I should not buy SUV’s, Exxon gas, tunafish, Kentucky fried chicken, fast food in general or to choose how my retirement funds are spent. Seems more like an acurate assestment than a “racist” stereotype.
When consumers decide for themselves what to buy, Western liberals become strict Marxists.
(MISINFORMATION AND HATE)
At worst an exaguration. At every point where I may choose to purchase a better or safer (note the SUV example above) they seek to demonize me for makeing that choice.
What’s strange is that iPods, innocuous creatures as they are, have become the subject of leftist rage.
(MISINFORMATION AND HATE)
Did you not the protest that Jobs faced recently from environmentalist? Seems like an accurate assestment.
Someone really should tell these Democrats that, in just one of the hand-held devices, they could store all of their old Barbra Streisand albums—not to mention various hilarious clips from Air America.
(MISINFORMATION AND HATE)
It is a joke, and it is funny
What is evident is that liberals define words differently:
MISINFORMATION
conservative: to intentionally offer false statements as fact for the purpose of misleading those who hear/read it.
liberal: To express an opinion that differs in substans from that which I believe to be true. The accurace of the staments has less bearing than the (political) correctness of the opinion.
HATE
conservative: To express malice for someone. To intend them harm.
liberal: to express an opinon different from my own.
RACIST:
conservative: Someone who thinks a person is less good or valueable in society because of the color of his skin or the historical background of his ancestory.
liberal: Anyone who does not want to afford special privileges based on race. Of course as your very quote shows: anyone who disagrees with you on anything must be a racist since simply expressing differing views from yours qualifies the author of this article as a racist.
This leads to some starnge conclusions:
A conservative president who acts on intellegence that turns out to be incorrect has lied. However, a president who offers knowingly false information under oath has not lied.
A conservative who wants to stop ILLEGAL immigration and make it easier to immigrate LEGALY is a a hate monger. However a liberal who openly ponders if the world would be better of if a conservative president was assasinated is viewed as a “thinker.”
Perhaps you should look inward for the MISINFORMATION and HATE.
LOL – please forgive my many typo’s and spelling errors in my earlier quote. It must have been an attempt to misinform you or express my hate.
ok Bobby, I will rewrite it so you can understand how hateful it is:
Title: Conservatives should crawl back into their Apple iPods
(offended yet?)
Conservatives, alas, have a habit of telling others what to like and dislike. Conservatives like free speach when it suits them, but are willing to violate it when it doesn’t.
(does this offend you? Is it true?)
Conservatives don’t care about the poor, and neither for the environment. God forbid, someone wants to help the poor, or preserve our environment, Conservatives turn into Fascists quicker than a rat turns on his friends.
(Is this an accurate statement?)
What’s strange is that iPods, innocuous creatures as they are, have become the subject of rightist rage.
(True?)
Someone really should tell these Republicans that, in just one of the hand-held devices, they could store all of their old Karl Rove tapings and listen to Toby Kieth as they reminisce about how they counterfeited democracy in this country.
Now I figure, you’re a conservative – haven’t I just described you perfectly? And before you go all nutty on me and start trying to poke holes in the arguments posted here, I want to remind you – Thats not the argument. The argument is that the guy writing this is an extremist – akin to a fundamentalist, and is spreading his HATE of Liberals in his writing. He doesn’t know the first fucking thing about “Liberals”. He, along with many others, have joined in this seperatist movement to put whatever hate they have into an ugly characature of what they call “Liberals”. Its delusional, and it is bad. It’s bad for this country. It’s hateful, and when people are hateful, they like to pick a group to blame it on. Wether that group is the “niggers”, the “Jews”, or the “Imperialistic Americans”. In this case it’s the “Liberals”.
Why do Sara and Kate have such manly tone to their views?
I find their gendered names and their style of expression highly. discordant.
I would not describe anything except the cursing as hate there. Though you would be guilty of misinformation.
Where have conservatives fought free speech? They have encouraged people to not purchase from companies that use their right to speek in harmful ways, but I have not in my lifetime heard then try to silence the voice. I can however point to many examples of liberals do that.
Conservatives don’t care about the poor. Yet another example of what i was talking about. Conservatives want policies to lift people out of poverty, not to simply give them a handout that keeps them in poverty (though I think as a group they do voluntarilly give more to charities than their liberal counterparts). Conservatives belive in gifts to help the poor and give them dignity not entitlements that assure they get subsistance.
What right wing groups have protested the iPod? none.
Well, I am not a country fan, so not much chance of toby Kieth making my iPod. As far as counterfiting democracy, how?
Like i said i do not see hate in this. I would certianly not equate it to racism. Racism is a horrible sign of ignorrance and hate. This from eather side is a perception of rality, wheather founded in fact or fantacy, it is not hate (though your last paragraph may infact be hate). I realize that at least on the last point you do not really belive what you wrote – but if you did it would simply reinforce my point.
As a rule, if you disagree with a conservative they tell you you are wrong and try to express why they disagree.
As a rule, if you disagree with a liberal they point at you and call you a lier, hate monger or idiot.
Look at the tone of my text versus yours. I pointed out cases (thogh all too briefly) where your facts were wrong. You resorted to cursing and using the most vile words you could find.
Your only attempt to show that it was hate was to turn the statements around and say how would i feel. I would say look at the facts. The statements you pointed out as racist were simply pointing out what appears to be true with a little humor.
It is odd that a leftist group is protesting Apple that could be a poster child for liberal ideals. It is strange that the left does seem to fight success where ever they can.
I find it strange that it is liberals that see the word liberal as slander. I have yet to see a liberal that would sit down and discuss the merits of liberal versus concervative ideals rationally, they always resord to name calling and reciting the catch phrases that they use to provoke hatred of conservatives.
However, most conservatives want to discuss ideals and and almost never resort to hate. If anything negative is expressed it is pity.
Once again look at the tone. One side is measured and reasoned. The other is full of real hate and hyperbole.
But back on topic. It is great that Apple is appealing to both sides.
If there are any liberals out there (i have known a couple) that understand an honest differance in ideals and can explain it to G Spank, I welcome it.
I knew you would miss the point.
“Apple promotes the iPod…with a counterculture package of freewheeling dancers, psychedelic coloring and raucous music.”
Dancing is “counterculture”? What the hell is this, “Footloose”? If there’s a journalistic equivalent of the Razzies, that article wins the blue ribbon.
We Americans hate, I repeat hate, all of you liberal, drivelling, low life, foreign (and minority American), scum bag, commie, slime!!!!!!!!! Keep whining losers no one gives a crap!!!! Go to hell you jealous group of losers. Stay in your hell hole countries and whine. Whatever.
I’m a proud conservative and reject the notion Mac users are inherently liberal. Liberal to me is an evil word. To associate the term with iPods or Apple is ridiculous. Let’s keep politics out of this. Apple is a company. iPod is an invention. Liberals are lazy and immoral. Nuff said!
While we’re at it, lets talk about what a typical Liberal believes in:
1) The rich should not be taxed less than the middle class.
2) It is the responsibility in a civilized society for the more fortunate to help the less fortunate
3) Protecting our environment should be a priority
4) Health care should not be a privelege of the rich
5) Going to war should not be founded on lies
Yeah, that’s about it. I can understand why the word “liberal” carries such hate, such terrible notions. All of the above is truly evil. Even though Jesus would agree with every point.
These are the CORE value systems. These are the ones that *really* matter.
Unfortunately, most conservatives have lost touch with reality, and have given into their own desire to hate a people with whom they share their country. They have so much anger in them, they are blinded to the truth and WANT to make their neighbors evil. They go out of their way to slander their neighbors, to call for a kind of witch hunt against them. It’s sad, unpatriotic, and anti-christian. Yet how ironically they wave their flags of misinformation and hate in the name of patriotism and religious zeal.
I think people use the word “hate” too freely. G Spank, I guess I missed your point too. I don’t think your examples were racist or hateful. Ridiculous, ignorant, cartoon-ish, childish, hyperbole (as Bobby offered) are all better descriptives than hate and racist. When you use words like hate and racist you immediately polarize people and if your goal is to get someone to see your point of view you don’t want to start the conversation with a punch to the stomach. Instead of posting a bitchy rant in a forum like this try asking why anyone would agree with the author and debate the issues from there.
That article made no sense whatsoever.
G Spank – I’m a professional tax preparer and I challenge you to provide one shred of evidence that supports this bullshit notion that the “rich” are taxed less than the middle-class.
Let’s talk about misinformation:
“1) The rich should not be taxed less than the middle class.”
This is an outrageous lie. The top 3% earners pay over 90% of ALL income taxes collected.
2) It is the responsibility in a civilized society for the more fortunate to help the less fortunate.
I love how they use the word “fortunate” like the people didn’t actually work their asses off but just suddenly fell into a boat load of money. Hey Spank, is the responsibilty for the hard working to help those that sit on their ass and contribute nothing?
3) Protecting our environment should be a priority.
Agreed. Now, list the priorties in order of importance. I think this is where we disagree.
4) Health care should not be a privelege of the rich.
And it isn’t. I think what you meant was that the best healthcare that money can buy shouldn’t be a privilege but that’s patently rediculous because in a free market prices dictates levels of service and quality. You want equal healthcare for everyone go to Cuba and let us know how that goes. Even in Canada the wealthy have access to better doctors, usually American.
5) Going to war should not be founded on lies.
Lie that EVERYONE thought was true until it turned out that our intelligence was bad, oh, and it was an election year. I think there is sufficient record of congressional democratics espousing the dangers of Saddam and his WMD’s to debunk this statement.
G Spank, pot, kettle, black.
Liberal Ideals:
1) The rich should not be taxed less than the middle class.
The richest 5% pay more than 80% of the tax burdon. while we are fast approaching the point where the lowest 50% pay NO net taxes. And a portion of them get a refund.
2) It is the responsibility in a civilized society for the more fortunate to help the less fortunate
No they believe it is a responsibility of the government. Most republicans give heavily to charity. I would prefer to help through my church were it can be more effective.
3) Protecting our environment should be a priority
Above all else. Republican belive in being good stewarts of the economy but to be reasonable about it.
4) Health care should not be a privelege of the rich
So they want to lower everybody’s healthcare to the lowest common denominator. Have you noticed that most of the cutting edge medical procedures are done here?
5) Going to war should not be founded on lies
Again, differance in understanding. George Bush spelled out the case that intelligence gave him. That intelligence was inaccurate. This is not a lie – it may have been incompetence in the intellegence agencies, but that is not a lie.
Can you say MISINFORMATION?
Liberals think republicans are evil because they disagree with the policies.
Conservatives do not see evil in liberals, we believe you are wrong, but in almost all cases we belive that you are well intentioned.
Bill,
Sure, I agree with you that “racist” is a powerful term to use here. Here is the definition from the dictionary:
racism |ˈrāˌsizəm| noun the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, esp. so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races. • prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on such a belief : a program to combat racism.
The way I see this is obviously that it’s not based on race, but based on a political belief system, and as such it satisfies the definition quite nicely.
I will reprise my point for you. People who spew forth articles that paint a particular group of people (Liberals, in this case) with lies, exaggerations, and half-truths in order to generate a kind of hatred toward that particular group of people are in a sense being racist (just not towards a race, but instead a large group based on a political belief system).
Anyway, I certainly am not going to get into an argument with you about the tax issue, because that would be like challenging Micheal Jordon to a game of basketball. I will just say it has been my broad understanding that large corperations have many ways in which they don’t pay taxes, and it certainly isn’t Republicans who are going to put an end to it.
And yeah, I can see that my rant came across as bitchy, because seeing this kind of shit pisses me off. As to the effect it has on people, I quote the following:
“We Americans hate, I repeat hate, all of you liberal, drivelling, low life, foreign (and minority American), scum bag, commie, slime!!!!!!!!! Keep whining losers no one gives a crap!!!! Go to hell you jealous group of losers. Stay in your hell hole countries and whine. Whatever.”
I happen to be among the “minoirty American” people, and this kind of garbage has got to go.
Bobby,
So basically, you are saying conservatives and liberals agree on all the same stuff, with very slight differences. That’s good…I think we all want this country to be great, and we all want our children to live in a peaceful and healthy world.
A few points:
1) I injured my leg in Ecuador, and recieved medical care there. Not only was the care first rate, but the care the doctors gave was shocking. It was so good I couldn’t believe it (being used to the hospitals here). It was also free. If a country like Ecuador can achieve something like this, then certainly we can. Face it, our system is fundamentally flawed.
2) when you said: “Republican belive in being good stewarts of the economy but to be reasonable about it.” I think you meant stewards of the environment. Some would say that was a very telling freudian slip.
3) When you say the problem is the goverment making people help the poor is the problem, I don’t understand. I mean, are you saying that helping the poor should be left to the kind will of some poeple, but not others? Do you really think in a capitalistic society that helping the poor is just something that some people can do if they want to? While we’re at it, let’s make paying taxes for our education optional. I’m sure we can rely on people’s good will to take care of everything.
4) I don’t know about you, but Bush’s runup to war looked painfully obvious that he was fudging the facts to justify his crusade to me. I am amazed anyone was surprised when the truth came out.
Everything else aside, because it mostly opinion at that point, I’d like to address your statement:
“I will just say it has been my broad understanding that large corperations have many ways in which they don’t pay taxes, and it certainly isn’t Republicans who are going to put an end to it.”
Why would you suggest that Republicans would allow any entity to not pay taxes as described under the IRC? Not paying taxes is tax evasion and that’s illegal. In light of that fact, are you sure you want to cling to your statement?
1) I injured my leg in Ecuador, and recieved medical care there. Not only was the care first rate, but the care the doctors gave was shocking. It was so good I couldn’t believe it (being used to the hospitals here). It was also free. If a country like Ecuador can achieve something like this, then certainly we can. Face it, our system is fundamentally flawed.
All i can say, is i like our system and would not be happy with what other countries have recieved from socialized medicine. Yes it is fundamentally flawed – there is too much government interferance – we need less not more.
2) when you said: “Republican belive in being good stewarts of the economy but to be reasonable about it.” I think you meant stewards of the environment. Some would say that was a very telling freudian slip.
I just type too fast. Put simply People come first. Clean water and air are necessities. Common sense comes first. For instance I would sacrifice EVERY spotted Owl to save ONE human life. Resposible drilling for oil in Alaska is a positive thing. Environmentalist have gone too far.
3) When you say the problem is the goverment making people help the poor is the problem, I don’t understand. I mean, are you saying that helping the poor should be left to the kind will of some poeple, but not others? Do you really think in a capitalistic society that helping the poor is just something that some people can do if they want to? While we’re at it, let’s make paying taxes for our education optional. I’m sure we can rely on people’s good will to take care of everything.
It is just the facts. What does the government get done effieciently?Everything the government gets involved with it messes up. It is a necissary evil, but it should be kept small. The poor need to be cared for in a way that leads them out of pverty. The current system keeps them poor by providing a subsitance level of income and makinging difficult to get out of the trap.
Education is a constitutional requirement. Do you not see the incredible wast when we spend $10,000 to $50,000 per child on education and we get the results we do? We need to change the system.
4) I don’t know about you, but Bush’s runup to war looked painfully obvious that he was fudging the facts to justify his crusade to me. I am amazed anyone was surprised when the truth came out.
Every intellegence agency was saying the same thing even the ones in countries that opposed the war. The reality is i wish we had done it sooner because my fear is the weapons do exist and we smuggled out. But either way, the war was the right decision based on the facts of the time. and as much as i hate war, the world will be a better place in the long run as a result.
Bill,
sure I will change my statement. It is my broad understanding that corperations and the uber rich have been given many tax incentives from Republicans. Shit, I will take it up a notch. I think people who make $1,000,000 a year should pay a higher rate than someone making $100,000 a year. Hows that? It is my understanding that someone who makes $1,000,000 a year has many options and ways to pay less of a percentage on their income than someone making $100,000 a year. I am sure there are people out there who as knowledgeable as you that could put up a great fight for ya. I am not one of them. So if you want to debate this, you’re out of luck. If you want to share your knowledge on the subject, that’s cool.
Bobby, I strongly disagree with you on some points. That’s ok, because I do not see evil in conservatives, I believe you are wrong, but in almost all cases I belive that you are well intentioned.
Good design doesn’t discriminate.
G Spank – ” I think people who make $1,000,000 a year should pay a higher rate than someone making $100,000 a year. Hows that?”
That’s fine, because that’s the way it is.
Here’s the facts for a single taxpayer in 2004:
Up to $7,149 – 10%
$7,150 – 29,049 – 15%
$29,050 – 70,349 – 25%
$70,350 – 146,749 – 28%
$146,750 – 319,099 – 33%
$319,100 and up – 35%
Personal Exemption phase out at $142,700 and is completely lost at $265,200
Itemized Deductions phase out at $142,700
Social Security tax is limited to first $87,900 however Medicare tax is unlimited.
Single taxpayer with AGI over $110,000 does not qualify to particpate in Roth IRA and cannot make deductible contributions to a standard IRA.
G Spank, I understand that certain people make statements regarding the income tax system that would lead you to your current beliefs but those are people who do not understand it any better than you, have an agenda and are trying to illicate a certain response from you to make you sympathetic to their cause.
“Reflect on the fact that no one is stealing Molly Ivins’ new book”
…priceless
Molly Ivins wrote a book?
Thanks for the info Bill. I’m glad to see that it is set up that way – makes sense to me.
I can’t believe they had to explain what a deadhead is. . . who *is* their demographic?
So G-Spank,
How can you rant and rave about something you have no clue about? Typical liberal. Great work emabarrassing yourself!
Liberals and conservatives are stupid.
“Where have conservatives fought free speech?”
Funniest thing I’ve read all year.
effwierd,
so funny I forgot to laugh. it’s the liberals fighting free speech every where they can. you know it.
effwerd, it’s a shame you’re too stupid to understand the point that was being made there.
Stan, you’re a jackass. When was the last time you ever heard anyone concede a point in a forum? I am certain you are the kind of idiot that would never ever admit that you were wrong about anything.
Trying to hold any kind of decent conversation in these forums opens you up to the assholes that you guys are. I appreciate the fact that Bobby and Bill could hold a decent forum here. We may not agree, but we’re all mature enough to at least give each other credit as human beings that actually share similar goals.
Bill said “Single taxpayer with AGI over $110,000 does not qualify to particpate in Roth IRA and cannot make deductible contributions to a standard IRA.”
A-ha!! So Americans do support terrorism!!!! And the poor ones can make it tax-deductable!!!!!
Caught with your fingers in the cookie jar……
And now for the obligatory smiley to avoid someone born without the humour gene telling me what a Yank-hating tree-hugging commie arse-bandit I am and how I’m just jealous.
Another article that goes out of its way to inflame. Don’t bother reading this crap. Starve the sucker!!!
Yeah, Mark, I know it. Those liberals are trying every day to prevent family planning clinics from discussing abortion. Or contraception in sex education. And those vicious assaults on Hollywood! I mean it’s only fair that when you say “fuck” on the air, you get fined 250K.
G Spank, I understood your stupid points. I was just saying neither liberals nor conservatives have a monopoly on stupidity. I believe in equality.
I do not have time to continue this discusion today, but needed to comment on effwerd last point – then i am going to have to go away.
Conservatives do not attempt to silence those voices. However we do believe in a parents right to raise their kids. A parent has the right and responsibility to protect their kids from the bad ideas of some.
However we do not seek to silence those groups, only to deny them the government funds to do so. If my child is faced with an unwanted pregnacy, I do not want the government funded free clinic to be encouraging her to “murder” her child. I know there is disagreement on whether abortion is murder, I am not going to go into that. But I will surely fight to keep funds from that. However if a private clinic wants to do that more power to them and i hope that groups use their free speech rights to stand out front and protest … wait a minute the liberals criminalized that right – they can’t stand on the public street in front unless they want to face federal racketeering charges. I guess to try to take away taxpayer funding is anti-speach even though you do not actually stop someone. But to put someone in jail for actually expressing their beliefs is not a hinderance in free speach. I am not to good with liberal definitions.
As to contreception in sex-ed. I am all for it, as long as we remind them that abstinance is the only 100% effective form.
As for the word f— on air. Keep it to cable. There is limited over-the-air bandwidth, keep it to the community standards. Cable and satilite can cater to the crowd that want that – and parents can block those channels.
well got to work so I can try to get to that 35% bracket.
Family planning clinics don’t just service teens. Besides, you’re saying conservatives support freedom of speech unless it’s against conservative values, then conservatives will use government funds to blackmail private organizations into submission. As for denying anti-abortion protesting in front of clinics, I’ve already addressed the issue: liberals are stupid, too. Then again, anti-abortion protesters do have a tendency to harass and sometimes kill those who oppose them. Maybe “free speech zones” might be in order.
As for profanity on air, my point was the heavy-handed deterrent. Supporting free speech is one thing. Pointing economic nukes at someone and telling them to say what they like and suffer the consequences is another. (Aside: The FCC received around three million emails expressing opposition to expanding corporate ownership of media; they were ignored. The FCC received a little over three thousand emails expressing disdain for Janet Jackson’s boobie on the Super Bowl; this resulted in the current fine regime.)
Well, I’m off to burn an American flag to show my support for free speech.
These clinics use federal tax money. I have no problems with using that to limit what they offer. If they want the federal money then play by the rules. If they don’t then fine, they are free to pursue any legal path they wish. I really hate that a couple of idiots chose to resort to violence, but the bulk of those protesting do nothing but use words. I am all for procecutting any one who acts in violence, a position that is held by 99.99% of all those on the right side of the abortion debate.
Perhaps we should make environmentalist causes illegal because of the unibomber. Or greenpeaces terrorist bombings. No, I like most conservatives are all for free speech. But if we want to start putting limits on freedoms based on the actions of a few crazies, then the left will be silenced far more than the right.
Should the FCC override 225+ years of Amircan law that demands that the press be privately owned to take the unconstitutional position of nationalizing the TV and radio outlets? I don’t think so. Besides, you are concerned about the FCC fining coorporations, yet you seem to want to give them complete control – is this even logical?
The FCC should make it’s rules clear and enfoce them fairly. It should provide for appeals if you belive the rules are unfair. I have a lot of issues with the FCC as well, but I am not going to throw the baby out with the bath water. You seem to believe that the you should be able to say f— on the air. Where do we draw the line then? Can we show the act in the most vile pornographic depiction? You may find signifigant support for the formor, but the later would not be supported by many. Anywhere the line is drawn there will be some who consider it too intrusive. If there is FCC is out of the mainstream they will be forced to move.
Should we point out that it was the liberal Kerry campaign who went to court to stop a documentary they claimed was unfair? They were offered the right to refute the charges, but that was not what they wanted – to silence the voices. Strangly if there was no truth, they could have simply allowed the military to release his records.
It is the left that is trying to stop the insertion of some conservative commentary on PBS after decades of liberal programming?
Conservatives are accused of being anti-free speech if they suggest that the industry print ratings on their products. Yet Liberals get to be considered pro-free speech when they use the courts to actually silence voices.
“These clinics use federal tax money. I have no problems with using that to limit what they offer.”
Yes, I know. I already pointed out that you seem comfortable with using federal dollars in coercing speech.
“Perhaps we should make environmentalist causes illegal because of the unibomber. Or greenpeaces terrorist bombings. No, I like most conservatives are all for free speech.”
You must not live in the PNW.
“Should the FCC override 225+ years of Amircan law that demands that the press be privately owned to take the unconstitutional position of nationalizing the TV and radio outlets? I don’t think so. Besides, you are concerned about the FCC fining coorporations, yet you seem to want to give them complete control – is this even logical?”
I don’t understand this. The mention of public correspondence for the two issues was to contrast what the FCC deems appropriate to act on. 3,000,000 against expanding corporate ownership of media; result: nothing. 3,000 emails protesting Jackson’s nipple; result: dramatic increase in indecency fines. I made no mention of ceding control of the media to corporate consolidation. Neither did I mention nationalization of the media, which is patently absurd. And I didn’t even hint at “throwing the baby out with the bath water.” You mention providing for public appeals and fair enforcement; I believe my example illustrates that the FCC is arbitrary and selective in these aspects. The FCC prefers unregulated consolidation and heavily regulated data transmission.
You slippery slope fallacy regarding saying “fuck” and broadcasting vile pornography is bad form. Do you have a real argument?
“It is the left that is trying to stop the insertion of some conservative commentary on PBS after decades of liberal programming?”
More humor; that’s good. So Repubs trying to force PBS to represent particular views is free speech? Again, you reveal that independent organizations that receive public funds are not, in fact, independent. They are, and should be, vulnerable to coercion to suit the ideology of the predominant powers of the time. Is this even logical?