[asterisk-biz] Re: OT: Gore Still Ahead
Matthew Rubenstein
email at mattruby.com
Thu Oct 5 19:06:05 MST 2006
Finally a request to kill this thing. I embrace the opportunity. Thank
you for the excuse.
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 22:19 -0400, Fred Cole wrote:
> guys, seriously please move this thread offlist.
>
> thank you
>
>
>
> ---------- Original Message -----------
> From: Matthew Rubenstein <email at mattruby.com>
> To: C F <shmaltz at gmail.com>
> Cc: Asterisk-Biz <asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
> Sent: Thu, 05 Oct 2006 21:52:31 -0400
> Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Re: OT: Gore Still Ahead
>
> > On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 19:53 -0400, C F wrote:
> > > On 10/5/06, Matthew Rubenstein <email at mattruby.com> wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 12:02 -0500, James wrote:
> > > > > OK,
> > > > >
> > > > > Send your kid to public school.
> > > > > If he survives the random shootings and the drugs,
> > > >
> > > > Practically everyone survives public school without any
> shootings. The
> > > > drugs are even worse in private schools (I can attest), as can be the
> > > > violence (ditto). Home schooling can create kids with even worse
> > > > antisocial problems.
> > >
> > > I went to private school all my life, I have never seen what drugs
> > > looks like in real life (not even outside school), and yes I grew up
> > > in Brooklyn. I guess the private school you went to is worse than the
> > > public school system.
> > > I do agree though on the home schooling.
> >
> > I went to private school in the 1980s in the richest zipcode in the
> > USA
> > (2 miles outside NYC). Drugs everywhere. I also went to Andover,
> > Bush Jr's highschool: drugs anywhere. And I live in Brooklyn, which
> > has had so much drug use that it takes willful shelter to never see
> > it (which is available in some private schools). Avoiding all
> > contact with drugs is mainly dependent on one's parents, with which
> > I'm sure we both agree.
> >
> > > > > then you can send him to
> > > > > the District of Columbia to be an aid.
> > > > > There he can be influenced by powereful men (and women) to do some really
> > > > > neat things.
> > > >
> > > > That is clearly the problem. The power of politicians to escape
> > > > responsibility exactly when they must be *more* responsible than the
> > > > general public. The government as a whole is infected: cops can kill
> > > > someone without justification and just get fired, when anyone else would
> > > > go to jail. America has reversed our fundamental philosophy of
> > > > distrusting the government, running it so wrongdoers are more easily
> > > > caught, into creating a privileged class (which is increasingly
> > > > hereditary, in dynasties).
> > >
> > > Couldn't agree more with you on this, it's a problem with any type of
> > > government;
> > >
> > > "The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation
> > > with the average voter."
> > >
> > > ~ Winston Churchill
> > >
> > > "Democracy is the worst form of government except for all those others
> > > that have been tried."
> > >
> > > ~ Winston Churchill
> >
> > There we go, agreeing again.
> >
> > > > > He can live in a city where violent crime is high and civilians can't
> buy a
> > > > > handgun to protect themselves.
> > > >
> > > > Or in the country where people shoot each other because they can get
> > > > away with it. NYC was much less safe when we could easily buy handguns.
> > > > The violent crime rates are usually higher where guns are easier to get.
> > > > More urban states are more or less in the middle, so clearly there's
> > > > another controlling factor than whether a target lives in a city or not.
> > >
> > > It is still very easy to get a handgun in the City, it's just very
> > > hard to hide it. The NYPD at the moment has more intelligence on the
> > > street than the CIA has about OBL. They are one of the most
> > > sophisticated intelligence agency that exists, except that it gathers
> > > intelligence only for street crimes and not for politics, or military.
> > > Their crime stats program doesn't allow for either a cop to get
> > > corrupted in a neighborhood, or for the crime to jump just in one
> > > place.
> >
> > No, it's not easy. Believe me, my family has had handguns and other
> > guns for generations, often defending family businesses in bad areas
> > of NYC (Manhattan, Brooklyn, the Bronx). I've known of people
> > getting illegal guns to buttress their paranoia through the decades.
> > And it's much harder now to get a gun in NYC. So much harder that
> > most of them come from other states, but still fewer come in.
> >
> > If you're using cop corruption as a measure of how tight is NYPD
> > intel, then you should at least read the NY Post, though Google can
> > help, too:
> > http://www.google.com/search?q=%22corrupt%20cops%22%20nyc%20-movie%
> > 20-film . Much tighter, of course, is the "Blue Wall" that covers up
> > cop corruption. And then there's the stats that cover up NYC crime
> > rates, converting violent crimes to less enraging stats. And then
> > there's the crimes by cops who intimidate people into keeping their
> > crimes in the neighborhoods cops don't protect, so they don't get
> > reported. Most of the crime drop is the result of social services
> > since the late 1960s that have reduced the numbers of desperate
> > people who do crime. But I don't expect you believe that, because it
> > shows how abortions, foster care, violence education, job training,
> > and other engagement of poor people by government people can make
> > everyone's lives better, without using a gun to get there. AFAICT,
> > we don't agree that much.
> >
> > > > > While he is learing how to avoid being raped or mugged, he can dodge the
> > > > > terrorist plane crashings.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think a single incident has any statistical significance. I
> > > > don't think the 9/11/2001 planebombings indicate anything about what
> > > > it's like to live in a city, or have anything to do with any of this.
> > > > Except maybe a reflection of how you hate NYC, and find an excuse to say
> > > > those planebombings are "just another bad thing that happens in NYC". As
> > > > a New Yorker, I think that sucks.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Responsibility starts at home, with the parents. Would you really want to
> > > > > send your child out to play on the "Hill"?
> > > > > Most aids come from affluent households with educated parents.
> > > > > I would guess that there's not a one of them that would have morgatged
> thier
> > > > > house and loand Foley the money for a year, but they freely hand over
> their
> > > > > children...
> > > >
> > > > The bigger point being made about Foley's child molesting is how
> it was
> > > > being covered up by his fellow Republicans. How are the kid's parents to
> > > > blame for that? Even if what the abused page's sponsoring Rep, Rodney
> > > > Alexander (R-LA), said was true, that the kid's parents, when
> > > > "informed", said they didn't want to make a big deal over it, that
> > > > doesn't excuse the rest of those Republicans from ignoring their
> > > > responsibility to protect the rest of the pages.
> > > >
> > > > It's hard to blame most parents for trusting that their kids
> won't be
> > > > sexually abused by letting them work for Congressmembers. Until now.
> > > > Which is some of the extreme damage done to our country by Foley and his
> > > > coverup conspiracy.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Foley screwed up and I think the latest remarks about alcoholism and being
> > > > > molested as a child are copouts.
> > > >
> > > > That's clear to us individuals watching closely, but already
> yesterday
> > > > I heard a 5-second radio news bulletin that mentioned Foley as a child
> > > > molesting Congressman, contextualized with "Foley claims he was abused
> > > > as a child by a clergyman". Millions of people are hearing this story
> > > > peripherally to their real lives, boiled down to those two details.
> > > > Foley deliberately threw that out there to define himself as "the
> > > > molested Congressman" rather than "the molester Congressman". What a
> > > > scumbag. And if others in his coverup conspiracy planned that media spin
> > > > with him, they should burn, too.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Yes, it is time to clean house. Five year term limits for a couple of
> > > > > generations will do more to cure these problems than any arguments about
> > > > > Republicans or Democrats.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think that term limits do nearly as much as reporting
> > > > politicians' records to voters. When incumbents are found manipulating
> > > > the electoral process, that is a reason for term limits. But when their
> > > > party is conspiring to cover up their lawbreaking, their exploitation of
> > > > children in the government's care, then term limits mean nothing. Unless
> > > > you mean forced turnover of a party's majority, which is clearly
> > > > antidemocratic, though perhaps consistently republican (small letters
> > > > intended). The real reform is to outlaw parties as illegal conspiracies,
> > > > which they of course always are, even when they're not conspiring to
> > > > protect child molesters. Maybe just outlaw exclusive party membership,
> > > > but then criminal conspirators will game that system.
> > > >
> > > > I say we start by throwing out the party which has specifically
> proven
> > > > it is covers up child molestation by its members. Republicans were
> > > > getting thrown out anyway - it's a gift to them that they can blame
> > > > Foley for "losing Congress", rather than everything else people are
> > > > holding against them this year.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > James Taylor
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "Jay R. Ashworth" <jra at baylink.com>
> > > > > To: <email at mattruby.com>; "Commercial and Business-Oriented Asterisk
> > > > > Discussion" <asterisk-biz at lists.digium.com>
> > > > > Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2006 10:04 AM
> > > > > Subject: Re: [asterisk-biz] Re: OT: Gore Still Ahead
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Oct 05, 2006 at 12:03:28AM -0400, Matthew Rubenstein wrote:
> > > > > >> Are you looking for ways to excuse the child molesting Foley did just
> > > > > >> because he continued carrying on after the boys were legally men?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Let's be *perfectly clear* here, shall we?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "Talking dirty" to them does not constitute "child molestation" under
> > > > > > any construction of anyone's law that I'm aware of.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > And 16 isn't exactly a child, either.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> What kind of depraved child molester protector are you? Other than
> > > > > >> "Republican" - that much is so obvious that it's redundant. Now tell us
> > > > > >> that I shouldn't go so hard on Foley, because it's not his fault that
> > > > > >> god made him gay.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You can go as hard on Foley as you like. I hope he takes the whole,
> > > > > > sordid, hypocritical Republican establishment down with him. just lets
> > > > > > be hard on him for the right reasons: he owed a duty to his
> > > > > > constituency not to get embroiled in a scandal, and he owed a duty to
> > > > > > those pages *specifically*, because he was or had been in a position of
> > > > > > direct power and control over them. He failed in those duties.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Would this have been less likely to have happened had he been out about
> > > > > > his preference? (For men, I mean, not for boys.) Yeah, probably.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Is it society's fault that he felt he needed to be even partially in
> > > > > > the closet? Yes?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Am *I* gay? No.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do I want people to confuse me for Donald Rumsfeld? Not even on your
> > > > > > birthday. :-)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You can tell the repubs apart from the dems because, by and large, the
> > > > > > dems utilise the tools of rational argument, and are calm and cool, and
> > > > > > the repubs appeal to emotion, fear, and (dare we say this) terror.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Not all of either side, certainly, but a statistically significant
> > > > > > majority.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Alas, demagoguery works better with the electorate than pedagogy.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > -- jra
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Jay R. Ashworth
> > > > > > jra at baylink.com
> > > > > > Designer Baylink
> RFC
> > > > > > 2100
> > > > > > Ashworth & Associates The Things I Think
> '87
> > > > > > e24
> > > > > > St Petersburg FL USA http://baylink.pitas.com +1
> 727 647
> > > > > > 1274
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "That's women for you; you divorce them, and 10 years later,
> > > > > > they stop having sex with you." -- Jennifer Crusie; _Fast_Women_
> > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
> > > > > >
> > > > > > asterisk-biz mailing list
> > > > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> > > > > > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
> > > > >
> > > > > asterisk-biz mailing list
> > > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> > > > > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > (C) Matthew Rubenstein
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
> > > >
> > > > asterisk-biz mailing list
> > > > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> > > > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
> > > >
> > --
> >
> > (C) Matthew Rubenstein
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com --
> >
> > asterisk-biz mailing list
> > To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
> > http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
> ------- End of Original Message -------
>
--
(C) Matthew Rubenstein
More information about the asterisk-biz
mailing list