Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Alia

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13
16
Right wing / Re: Tax protesters vs Acorn rent-a-mob
« on: August 31, 2009, 05:02:05 pm »
I never thought I'd say this but...

I'm offended.

You have to admit, it took quite a lot. Get a Time Machine and learn how to ask, "Would you bail out the big banks?" in German.

17
The Public Forum / Re: Haircut help
« on: August 27, 2009, 10:03:55 pm »
I like your old cut. But then again I like nerdish things so you should probably discount what I say outright if not do the opposite.

18
Big Government - Authoritarian / My Problem with Universal Health Care
« on: August 27, 2009, 09:59:24 pm »
I believe there's one glaring problem with universal health care that stands above all others as what should be the cause of discontent.

And that is Fault, and Reason. Perhaps it is unthinkable to simply let people die, but this idea adds a premise as it moves along toward universal health care, and that's the premise that it doesn't matter how a person came to their ailments. I don't find it unthinkable to let smokers die of cancer, I find the alternative unthinkable: To make those who sacrifice to live well pay the hundreds of thousands of dollars associated with treating lung cancer. Why, I could throw myself off a cliff and the rest of the taxpayers could fit the bill for all my rehabilitation therapy.

There has been a lot of talk of rights, as in, health care should be a right. I don't necessarily disagree. However, I think the terminology is being twisted; health care is a need, not a right. Having what one earns is a right. It seems that in this country, when need and right cannot both be met, need wins out no matter the circumstance. Once a person decides to smoke, and gets cancer, the need of that person for medical care always will come into conflict with the rights of all others, since it is very unlikely that a given individual will have the means to pay for the care himself. Therefore he must steal - here I term it stealing because it is taking without earning no matter who endorses it - the money from others.

So need wins over rights. This in itself is not a bad thing, at least not in every case. From childhood, children might be exposed to one of the warm, fuzzy Disney movies like Robin Hood, or Aladdin, which includes a scene in which the main character steals bread to feed the poor, which is portrayed as "good" as are the infamous actions of Robin Hood. So as a whole, our society accepts that Need > Right. However, that opens the door to a whole new issue: Irresponsible creation of need. Those who need health care because they are irresponsible clearly fall into this category, and it's a large category, inclusive of such disreputable beings as the injured drunk driver, the cancerous smoker, the victim of an extreme sports or thrillseeking accident, those who attempt suicide, the AIDS-infected, and the perpetually pregnant. I don't know if I could here mention obesity or not.

Those who are ill because they are irresponsible must be left to die, or pay for their own mistakes. When that happens I will be for universal health care.

19
The Mud pile / Watch Glenn Beck; Don't Buy Clorox
« on: August 24, 2009, 05:14:06 pm »
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090824/ap_on_en_tv/us_tv_beck_s_advertisers

Quote
Attack on Obama riles Beck's advertisers

By DAVID BAUDER, AP Television Writer David Bauder, Ap Television Writer – Mon Aug 24, 10:18 am ET
NEW YORK – Glenn Beck returns to Fox News Channel on Monday after a vacation with fewer companies willing to advertise on his show than when he left, part of the fallout from calling President Barack Obama a racist.

A total of 33 Fox advertisers, including Wal-Mart Stores Inc., CVS Caremark, Clorox and Sprint, directed that their commercials not air on Beck's show, according to the companies and ColorofChange.org, a group that promotes political action among blacks and launched a campaign to get advertisers to abandon him. That's more than a dozen more than were identified a week ago.

While it's unclear what effect, if any, this will ultimately have on Fox and Beck, it is already making advertisers skittish about hawking their wares within the most opinionated cable TV shows.

The Clorox Co., a former Beck advertiser, now says that "we do not want to be associated with inflammatory speech used by either liberal or conservative talk show hosts." The maker of bleach and household cleaners said in a statement that it has decided not to advertise on political talk shows.

The shows present a dilemma for advertisers, who usually like a "safe" environment for their messages. The Olbermanns, Hannitys, O'Reillys, Maddows and Becks of the TV world are more likely to say something that will anger a viewer, who might take it out on sponsors.

They also host the most-watched programs on their networks.


"This is a good illustration of that conundrum," said Rich Hallabran, spokesman for UPS Stores, which he said has temporarily halted buying ads on Fox News Channel as a whole.

Beck can bring the eyeballs. With the health care debate raising political temperatures, his show had its biggest week ever right before his vacation, averaging 2.4 million viewers each day, according to Nielsen Media Research.

He was actually on another Fox show July 28 when he referred to Obama as a racist with "a deep-seated hatred for white people." The network immediately distanced itself from Beck's statement, but Beck didn't. He used his radio show the next day to explain why he believed that. He would not comment for this article, spokesman Matthew Hiltzik said.

ColorofChange.org quickly targeted companies whose ads had appeared during Beck's show, telling them what he had said and seeking a commitment to drop him. The goal is to make Beck a liability, said James Rucker, the organization's executive director.

"They have a toxic asset," Rucker said. "They can either clean it up or get rid of it."


It's not immediately clear how many of the companies actually knew they were advertising on Beck's show. Sometimes commercial time is chosen for a specific show, but often it is bought on a rotation basis, meaning the network sprinkles the ads throughout the day on its own schedule. Sometimes ads appear by mistake; Best Buy said it bought commercial time for earlier in the day, and one of its ads unexpectedly appeared in Beck's show.

One company, CVS Caremark, said it advertises on Fox but hadn't said anything about Beck. Now it has told its advertising agency to inform Fox that it wanted no commercials on Beck.

"We support vigorous debate, especially around policy issues that affect millions of Americans, but we expect it to be informed, inclusive and respectful," said spokeswoman Carolyn Castel.

Besides the unpredictability of the opinionated cable hosts, the rapid pace of today's wired world complicates decisions on where to place ads, said Kathleen Dunleavy, a spokeswoman for Sprint. She said she was surprised at how fast the Beck issue spread across social media outlets and how quickly advertiser names were attached to it.

UPS' Hallabran said the decision to pull commercials "should not be interpreted as we are permanently withdrawing our advertising from Fox." He said the company wants to reach viewers with a wide spectrum of opinions.

Except for UPS Stores, there's no evidence that any advertisers who say they don't want to be on Beck's show are leaving Fox. Network spokeswoman Irena Briganti said the companies have simply requested the ads be moved elsewhere and that Fox hasn't lost any revenue.

She wouldn't say whether Fox was benefiting from any anti-anti-Beck backlash, with companies looking to support him. Some Beck supporters have urged fans to express their displeasure at companies for abandoning their man.

Beck supporters have suggested that retaliation might have something to do with ColorofChange.org's campaign. One of the group's founders, Van Jones, now works in the Obama administration and has been criticized by Beck. But Rucker said Jones has nothing to do with ColorofChange.org now and didn't even know about the campaign before it started.

Beck's strong ratings — even at 5 p.m. EDT he often outdraws whatever CNN and MSNBC show in prime-time — make it unlikely Beck is going anywhere even as the list of advertisers avoiding him approaches three dozen.

But it could mean advertising time becomes cheaper on his show than such a large audience would normally command. Some of his show's advertisers last week included a male enhancement pill, a law firm looking to sue on behalf of asbestos victims, a company selling medical supplies to diabetics and a water filter company.

Rucker said ColorofChange.org has contacted about 60 companies regarding Beck, and is heartened by the response.

"It's causing a certain conversation around Beck, which I think is important," he said.

___

On the Net:

http://www.colorofchange.org

http://www.foxnews.com

___

EDITOR'S NOTE — David Bauder can be reached at dbauder"at"ap.org

20
Global / Re: Hydrogen Car Gets 1336 MPG
« on: July 14, 2009, 07:01:13 pm »
One look at this is all it takes to know that it will never go through. Whoever buys the rights to manufacture it will be bullied into submission and ruin.

The oil companies will fight it. They will fight it at every turn, on the production line, on the safety test, everywhere. With enough money, you can turn pointless objections and accusations into massive roadblocks.

I think I hate Capitalism.

21
Third party forum / Re: Why Vote Third Party?
« on: July 13, 2009, 01:18:59 am »
I tend to agree, recently I've joined the modern whig party... it fits my perspective a lot better than the republicans and I'm pretty fed up with them anyway.

I suppose you finally saw the light that I told you to see in the beginning, when I said, "You know, Gaius, the only difference between you and me [regarding the 2008 election] is that you're going to be disappointed when your candidate loses."

If you live in a blue state, you're "throwing your vote away" just as much by voting Republican anyway.

22
Third party forum / Re: Why Vote Third Party?
« on: July 13, 2009, 01:10:48 am »
Or you could vote for the candidate you think is best regardless of party, since purposely voting 3rd party isn't much better than voting for the main parties. Then again, I hate the party system - so purposely voting for any particular party just because it's that party, or it's not another party just seems like a voting sin to me.

The thing to remember is that it costs more in favours to get to any position in a main party. It's not about deliberately voting against a foxglove because it's a foxglove, it's about voting against a foxglove because foxgloves are poisonous. A main-party candidate may seem to run in line with your own political beliefs, but unless yours also run in line with the special interests that have pushed him this high, you will not get what you voted for.

Every ad you see endorsing a canditate is a piece of that candidate that's been sold to special interests. "Always vote Third Party" is a simple way of excluding most of these sold-off individuals. Being main-party entails something that isn't desirable that being Third Party need not entail, and that is having been bought and sold to special interests.

23
The Mud pile / Re: Obama Keeps the Change
« on: July 11, 2009, 10:52:51 pm »
That's the animal farm version of civil rights, not the kind I support.

A thing is what it is. Until you gain power and change it, that is. Until then, Civil Rights is a single-edged sword, as is racism. You can't argue with the fact that something exists just by disputing the fairness of its existence.

24
The Mud pile / Re: Obama Keeps the Change
« on: July 11, 2009, 09:02:21 pm »
You just don't want to sound racist, which it will be anyway because it attacks Obama.

25
The Mud pile / Re: Obama Keeps the Change
« on: July 10, 2009, 10:16:58 pm »
Then I'd have to put "all of us" because American Citizens makes it not fit the metre.

26
The Mud pile / Re: Obama Keeps the Change
« on: July 10, 2009, 08:55:33 pm »
Well his father was, hense the second line.

But admittedly it needs work.

27
The Public Forum / Re: The Zoo
« on: July 10, 2009, 08:47:39 pm »
I like the peacock, and the giraffe-worshippers, and the brown bird.

28
The Mud pile / Re: Obama Keeps the Change
« on: July 10, 2009, 08:42:58 pm »
Well here's my take on that. *sings to the tune of Sir Robin Ran Away*

Bravely bold Obama,
Rode forth from Muslim Land.
To take our country's heart away,
So all the whites would rue the day,
And my oh my oh how they would pay...
They can't refuse his outstretched hand,
Just how Obama planned!

He wasn't in the least bit shamed,
For who, a black man, ever blamed?
No one would dare revolt or cry,
That he should bid the office bye,
Or play it fair, or dare, to try,
Or tell the poor sweet people why,
And no one even thinks it strange...
Obama keeps the change,
Obama keeps the change!

29
On second thought, the alternate title would read better were it, Obama Keeps the Change.

*sigh*

30
The Mud pile / Obama Keeps the Change
« on: July 10, 2009, 08:00:37 pm »
Here's Your Change.

Michelle Obama Takes Girls to London for Fish and Chips

Truly change we can believe in - or as was said during the campaign,

"We are the change we have been waiting for."

Imagine this - and when do we get totally fed up?

A Boeing 757 and a fleet of armoured cars for Michelle’s sight seeing tour!

Michelle One



On Sunday, President Obama flew back to the United States on Air Force One. His wife, two daughters and her mother did a bit of shopping in Paris before taking their own Boeing 757 (C-32) over to London to do some sight seeing.

We all remember Obama’s admonishment to corporate CEO’s in February:

“You can’t get corporate jets, you can’t go take a trip to Las Vegas or go down to the Super Bowl on the taxpayers dime.”

Apparently that doesn’t apply to his wife.

The London Times opened it’s description of Michelle’s visit this way:

Motorcycle outriders, armoured Chevrolets and bullet-headed men in raincoats criss-crossed London yesterday as Michelle Obamadoesn't and her daughters spent a second day on an unofficial visit to the capital..

The Times went on to describe that when Michelle and the girls arrived at Westminster Abbey, the building was closed to tourists with people already in told to “wait against the wall.” An American visiting the Abbey said “Right then I knew it was probably someone from our ‘royal family’.”



Michelle’s motorcade shut down the London street above as the First Lady of the World and her children go for Fish and Chips at a pub in Mayfair. The entourage inside the restaurant was 15 people while dozens more wait outside. Include the dozens of Air Force personnel to fly and service the plane, embassy personnel and other staff and we are talking about a serious expenditure of tax payer dollars.

Meanwhile, millions of Americans have lost their jobs and won’t be able to take their family on a summer holiday.

Despite their circumstances they’ll still be expected to fork over the tax dollars to pay for Michelle’s trip.

Can you imagine the gall of our First Royal Family?

52% wanted change. 100% got screwed.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 13