Tuesday Cow Mentality Open Comments

It seems the EU plans to train its populace to no longer become individuals, but to meld into one big herd, willing to be shepherded and corralled and controlled in the name of the world’s biggest hoax:

Siim Kallas, the EU transport commission, insisted that Brussels directives and new taxation of fuel would be used to force people out of their cars and onto “alternative” means of transport.

“That means no more conventionally fuelled cars in our city centres,” he said. “Action will follow, legislation, real action to change behaviour.”

Again, taxes are used to manage and control human behavior, and not as a revenue source for legitimate government expenses, like national defense.  The EU governments look at their people as objects to be controlled and harvested, like, well, cattle.

And that’s not all:

The plan also envisages an end to cheap holiday flights from Britain to southern Europe with a target that over 50 per cent of all journeys above 186 miles should be by rail.

So the term “cattle car” is not far from the truth, eh?  Imagine how this restriction on passenger flow will influence patterns in real estate, business, etc.  The government can, in effect, kill off or subsidize population and business centers by determining where the “official” traffic can flow.

Anybody up for Obamarail?

 

 

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • Google Buzz

162 thoughts on “Tuesday Cow Mentality Open Comments

  1. Once they complete the project, betcha a terrorist could shut down any of those cities with about a half dozen well placed car bombs.

    It wouldn’t take a very sophisticated organization to do it.

  2. The Border is more secure than its ever been.

    Except where its not.

    But in a rare admission, a Justice Department memo and other documents obtained by the San Antonio Express-News say federal authorities know terror suspects are in this country and know who allegedly helped bring them here through Mexico and Texas: a Somali man in custody near San Antonio.

    Mr. Orwell is on line 2.

  3. I took the liberty of editing your #2. I know what you meant but …

    Probly for the best.

    Thanks

  4. Cow Mentality

    I thought you were gonna talk about the First Lady for a minute.

    Just sayin’.

  5. Doing some reading round the web.

    Lets make a bet.

    Who will give me odds on Establishment Republicans coming to us at the end of the current session of the Lege and trying to convince us that the guys we elected to cut spending and lower taxes should be congratulated for all the hard work they did to keep the tax increases so low?

    I figger they’ll try it because they thought they had us fooled with the line iof crap they gave us about how necessary it was to spend the Rainy Day Fund and they should be congratulated for not spending as much of it as they thought they would.

  6. G’Morning all

    I lived and worked in Paris in ’92 and ’93. I lived in a suburban town called Sautroville and worked in another suburb call Cergy Pontoise. That would be similar to living in Richmond and working in Katy. The suburban driving was about like here, however, when I first got there I had the bright idea of driving into Paris on the weekend. I sat on the perphrique (Loop 61) for 45 minutes at a dead stop. When I finally made it downtown I discovered there was no place to park I discovered that Paris had 3,000,000 cars and 1,000,000 parking places. Double and triple parking was common. Needless to say, all of my future trips into town was via RER (railroad) and the subway. They do have a giantic vehicle problem over there.

  7. We’re sure lucky that no one in a position of authority in our government thinks the Eurotrash know how to run things, what with all their socialist programs and such. Oh, wait…….

    I think I’m still on target with the One’s agenda including arming Al-Queda to fight some mean dictators who would not let them in their countries. Once Sharia law is imposed upon all the world, will the scales fall from our eyes and we will finally see what we elected?

  8. Obama, by contrast, has been so subtle in his doctrine that he’s baffling Americans. By waiting to make his case to the nation for the action in Libya, he created a vacuum and invited confusion. A new Pew Research Center poll finds that while a plurality supports the attack in Libya, 17 percent of Americans have no opinion on the question. Meanwhile, 50 percent don’t think the United States and its allies have a clear goal.

    I know what the clear goal is.
    Its to keep the price of oil high enough that keeping cars out of cities makes sense, but not so high as to make it impossible for Obama to get re-elected.

  9. Good analysis on O’s speech last night. BTW, he must not have had much time to rehearse it, you could very plainly see his eyes going left to right as he was reading the teleprompter. There was a poll someplace that showed he his numbers stay the same. Just another ho-hum speech.

    FACT CHECK: How Obama’s Libya claims fit the facts
    By CALVIN WOODWARD and RICHARD LARDNER
    Associated Press

    FACT CHECK: How Obama’s Libya claims fit the facts

    WASHINGTON (AP) — There may be less than meets the eye to President Barack Obama’s statements Monday night that NATO is taking over from the U.S. in Libya and that U.S. action is limited to defending people under attack there by Moammar Gadhafi’s forces.

    In transferring command and control to NATO, the U.S. is turning the reins over to an organization dominated by the U.S., both militarily and politically. In essence, the U.S. runs the show that is taking over running the show.

    And the rapid advance of rebels in recent days strongly suggests they are not merely benefiting from military aid in a defensive crouch, but rather using the multinational force in some fashion – coordinated or not – to advance an offensive.

    Here is a look at some of Obama’s assertions in his address to the nation Monday, and how they compare with the facts:

    “Our most effective alliance, NATO, has taken command of the enforcement of the arms embargo and no-fly zone”

    THE FACTS: As by far the pre-eminent player in NATO, and a nation historically reluctant to put its forces under operational foreign command, the United States will not be taking a back seat in the campaign even as its profile diminishes for public consumption.

    The United States supplies 22 percent of NATO’s budget, almost as much as the next largest contributors – Britain and France – combined. A Canadian three-star general was selected to be in charge of all NATO operations in Libya. His boss, the commander of NATO’s Allied Joint Force Command Naples, is an American admiral, and the admiral’s boss is the supreme allied commander Europe, a post always held by an American.

    “Our military mission is narrowly focused on saving lives.”

    THE FACTS: Even as the U.S. steps back as the nominal leader, reduces some assets and fires a declining number of cruise missiles, the scope of the mission appears to be expanding and the end game remains unclear.

    Despite insistences that the operation is only to protect civilians, the airstrikes now are undeniably helping the rebels to advance. U.S. officials acknowledge that the effect of air attacks on Gadhafi’s forces – and on the supply and communications links that support them – is useful if not crucial to the rebels.

    “an important strategic interest in preventing Gadhafi from overrunning those who oppose him. A massacre would have driven thousands of additional refugees across Libya’s borders, putting enormous strains on the peaceful – yet fragile – transitions in Egypt and Tunisia.” He added: “I am convinced that a failure to act in Libya would have carried a far greater price for America.”

    THE FACTS: Obama did not wait to make that case to Congress, despite his past statements that presidents should get congressional authorization before taking the country to war, absent a threat to the nation that cannot wait.

    “The president does not have the power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” he told The Boston Globe in 2007 in his presidential campaign. “History has shown us time and again … that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the legislative branch.”

    Obama’s defense secretary, Robert Gates, said Sunday that the crisis in Libya “was not a vital national interest to the United States, but it was an interest.”

    “And tonight, I can report that we have stopped Gadhafi’s deadly advance.”

    THE FACTS: The weeklong international barrage has disabled Libya’s air defenses, communications networks and supply chains. But Gadhafi’s ground forces remain a potent threat to the rebels and civilians, according to U.S. military officials.

    OBAMA: “Some nations may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities in other countries. The United States of America is different. And as president, I refused to wait for the images of slaughter and mass graves before taking action.”

    THE FACTS: Mass violence against civilians has also been escalating elsewhere, without any U.S. military intervention anticipated.

    The Obama administration says Gbagbo and Gadhafi have both lost their legitimacy to rule. But only one is under attack from the U.S.

    Presidents typically pick their fights according to the crisis and circumstances at hand, not any consistent doctrine about when to use force in one place and not another. They have been criticized for doing so – by Obama himself.

    In his pre-presidential book “The Audacity of Hope,” Obama said the U.S. will lack international legitimacy if it intervenes militarily “without a well-articulated strategy that the public supports and the world understands.”

    He questioned: “Why invade Iraq and not North Korea or Burma? Why intervene in Bosnia and not Darfur?”

    Now, such questions are coming at him.

    Complete article here

    http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_OBAMA_LIBYA_FACT_CHECK?SITE=FLTAM&SECTION=US

  10. #14 el gordo
    US won’t rule out arming Libyan rebels

    The Obama administration has not ruled out arming rebel fighters in Libya, the US officials said Tuesday, despite assertions by key US allies that such a move would be outside the UN mandate.
    .
    “We’ve not made that decision… but we’ve not ruled that out,” Washington’s UN ambassador Susan Rice told ABC television when asked about military support to the fighters battling Kadhafi’s forces.

  11. #14 el gordo
    US won’t rule out arming Libyan rebels

    Of course not. The way they are armed now, they will eventually lose, and nobody wants that. They just won’t give them everything they need to win.

    If they ship over some Abrams for them to drive around, you’ll know I’m wrong.

  12. Looks like maybe the younger, more educated blacks may be getting it.

    First, according to the Times, the Blacks leaving tend to be the “younger and better educated”. Second, the three states Blacks left in largest numbers don’t just include snake-bit Michigan; the other two are Illinois and New York. Within those states, Chicago and the city of the New York (widely considered among the most successful cities in the country) are the places Blacks are deserting. 17 percent of the Black flight from Big Blue is from the Empire State; after almost a century of trailblazing social policy, New York State has succeeded in creating the most hostile environment for Blacks in the country.

    A welcome turn of events.

  13. #21 Hamous

    I’m sure Mo would love to have some more supporters over there. I suppose it’s too much to hope that the NBP members would charter a jet and fly on over to stay?

    Nahh….they can get more handouts here, and they’ll have “victim status” with which to beat the mean, evil white men who are oppressing them.

  14. TedTam,

    I have lived in Europe (Italy) and traveled thru most of the EU countries, I gotta tell you that my first choice would be EuroRail over air flights.

    I will concede that most of my travels were done when speed wasn’t the primary concern, but if I had to choose between standing in the long lines at the airport ticket counters for checkin (most of those waits could be measured in hours) and waltzing onto the train…I’ll go
    with the train.

    The train stations were located in or near the center of town and a short taxi ride delivered me and my luggage to a good hotel in minutes.

    I like traveling by rail over air and I am not one of those “train freaks”. Rail travel in the US does not compare. It is very hard to tell that the train is moving in Europe as the track quality is quite good. It is very difficult to hear yourself think on American rails as the track infastructure has gotten so bad.

    Simple

  15. Good morning Hamsters. Gloomy day so far starting with 65 at 5:30 and limping to 68 by 11.
    Light mist from the get-go morphing into heavier mist for a bit and back to lighter mist and a slightly brighter sky. Forecast for today is not inspiring.

    Mariposa is following a small anole who somehow snuck inside when the garden room door was open. He is valiantly trying to match the blue carpet in the family room and keep her at bay. She thinks he’s a playmate of sorts and keeps pushing him with a paw. He does his best roaring pose as they migrate along the side of the couch, a micro-dino wannabe. At last he slips under the couch, which is low enough that she can’t possibly get a paw under but he can comfortably fit.

    My plans thus far for the capture/release outside are frustrated by his hidey hole. Maybe later he will come out and dash for the garden room. Maybe Mariposa will continue to think of him as a playmate and not lunch. Maybe somebody will make Moammar a general.

  16. #26 I’ve invited many anoles to participate in my reptile relocation program. When I take them back outside, they almost look grateful. My cats, on the other hand, seem offended.

  17. #25 Simple

    That may be your experience, but it sounds like the drivers who live there now are pretty incensed over this attempt to curb their car use.

  18. Oh, and the regional train that Lovely and I used on our trip to Florence wasn’t one of those quiet Euroliners of which you speak. It clacked a bit, was slow, but it allowed us to enjoy the countryside and visit with our fellow travelers.

    I know a man (who acted as our tour guide and translator in Sicily) who recommended flying from Rome to Palermo for the last week of our trip. His words to me in 2007, somewhat verbatim from memory, were: “I’ve taken the train before, but they are slow and inconvenient. I much prefer to fly.”

    It seems that your train trips were on different rail lines or something.

  19. Please join me in remembering the life and many contributions of this timeless icon of the entertainment community. The Pillsbury Dough Boy died yesterday of a yeast infection and trauma from repeated pokes in the belly. He was 71. He is survived by his wife Play Dough, and three children, John Dough, Jane Dough, and Dosey Dough. Services were held at 3:50 for about 12 minutes.

  20. If “da man” can control your movements he controls you. This defines the goal of all totalitarian elitists – control. It also aptly describes why they want to tax the rich just to make it fair and social justice and all the rest of the avaricious failed crapola; they want control of your money and therefore your life. If the people are no longer allowed to drive their cars to the city, the government then owns/controls the city; those who live and work in the city will soon find that they no longer are able to even use a car so why have one at all? This will result in veritable slave status because if one can not “vote with his feet” he is no longer free.

  21. reptile relocation program

    I’m reminded of when I moved into my scorched earth subdivision. There were no lizards at all. We imported a bunch from my mother’s place in Spring Branch. Now the Anoles are all over along with the Geckos.

  22. From deep in the NO SH!T SHERLOCK department comes this:

    It urged Palestinians to take to the streets after Friday prayers on May 15 and begin an uprising. It read: “Judgment Day will be brought upon us only once the Muslims have killed all of the Jews.”
    Edelstein said the page incites to violence and violates Facebook content regulations.

    This page got 350,000 “friends” in just a day or 2 from those who are of the religion of peace. Funny how the message “Muslims have killed all of the Jews.” seems to just keep coming up isn’t it??

  23. The Weekly Standard has a really good article on those evil right-wing nutjob fargin’ icehole bastiges, the Koch brothers.

    For progressives confused at the heated opposition to their do-gooder agenda, the Kochs became convenient scapegoats. Invoking their name was a way to write off opposition to Obama as the false consciousness of racist rubes stoked by greedy businessmen. In the liberal imagination the Kochs ascended from obscurity to infamy in record time. Starting in the spring of 2009, whenever you turned on MSNBC or clicked on the Huffington Post you’d see the Kochs described in terms more applicable to Lex Luthor and General Zod.

  24. So two thirds of the GOM oil and gas leases are inactive- I wonder why?? Could it possibly be because the Feds refuse to approve drilling permits?? And now the jug-eared jackass orders a departmental review??? Apparently hypocrisy does not have any limits after all.

  25. 12 wagonburner says:
    March 29, 2011 at 8:31 am
    The MB in Egypt is hatin’ on teh ghey.

    From the article:

    With a record turnout, the vote was hailed as a success. But the “yes” campaign was based largely on a religious appeal: voters were warned that if they did not approve the amendments, Egypt would become a secular state.
    “The problem is that our country will be without a religion,” read a flier distributed in Cairo by a group calling itself the Egyptian Revolution Society. “This means that the call to the prayer will not be heard anymore like in the case of Switzerland, women will be banned from wearing the hijab like in the case of France,” it said, referring to the Muslim head scarf. “And there will be laws that allow men to get married to men and women to get married to women like in the case of America.” …

    One lesson that can be learned:

    If the nutcases can convince them that thier religion is in danger, they will vote for the nutcases.

    So.

    Ask yourself this question:

    Are you helping or hindering the nutcases in thier quest to convince the voters that you present a threat to thier religion?

  26. Well. the in-house anole is recovering (I hope) outside on the covered patio, rescued by moi several minutes ago. He had fled his under-the-couch sanctuary and was next seen under the edge of a cabinet in the family room, Mariposa experimentally flicking a paw at him and cocking her head. He ventured out a ways and ran behind the newspaper basket, Mariposa right behind. My trusty anole cacther in hand (spouse’s thank-you coffee mug from the ham radio club), I put it over the little fellow and tipped it sideways so he could crawl in it, pushing him from behind. Once in and turned upright and covered with my free hand, he made the trip to the back door and outside easily. He was gasping and didn’t move much. Hope he recovers enough to find a good hidey-hole.

    Meanwhile Mariposa is confused and busily retracing steps in her search. The she circles the newspaper basket numerous times before plopping down near it. She’s been there for about 15 minutes. Have told her he’s back outside and to forget him. Her enthusiasm is ebbing. A peek outside reveals he hasn’t moved much more. Will check again after lunch–mine. Once finished dining, another check outside shows he’s gone. Back inside Mariposa’s asleep next to the newspaper basket. All’s well that ends well.

  27. 29 Ted,

    I actually lived in Florence and made the run to Rome on a monthly basis. I can’t believe that you would prefer the airport in Florence or Rome to say…an oxcart.

    Simple

  28. Happy Birthday to John Browning’s design of the Colt M1911 semi-automatic pistol.

    1911 was the year the pistol was perfected. Everything else that followed is a copy or a poor attempt at something different.

  29. 36 Boney,

    Maybe, but a lot of the “Shelf” (aka shallow water) production was wiped out during
    Katrina and Rita. These platforms were already pretty shaky and declining in production.

    Apache, who is a secondary producer, lost 80% of their GOM shelf production and elected not to restart it in favor of cheaper oil overseas. They did not relinquish their leases.

    Most of the “shelf” production is now in the hands of tertiary producers. These are folks who will buy a distressed “property” and operate it on the skimpiest of shoe strings. We actually have a couple of operators that are barely producing enought gas to fuel their turbines.

    The deep water platforms, who were long believed to be the salvation of the GOM, are beginning declines sooner and more sever than expected.

    As to reserve predictions….Do you know what the alternative name for bald faced liar is?
    (Answer: Reservoir Engineer although Petroleum Geologist is an acceptable substitute)

    Simple

  30. Heh.

    Madison — Gov. Scott Walker’s administration no longer is collecting dues on behalf of state unions and, as of Sunday, is charging employees more for their pensions and health care, even though nonpartisan legislative attorneys say the changes are not yet law.

    Backing up the administration, the state Department of Justice argued that the new law – which eliminates most collective bargaining for public workers – is in effect and asked a judge to vacate a restraining order against the law. Meanwhile, a Dane County prosecutor asked a judge to declare that the law is not now in place.

    snip

    State workers began paying more for benefits starting Sunday, Administration Secretary Mike Huebsch said Monday in a conference call with reporters. They also no longer are being billed for union dues, and those changes will show up on checks issued April 21, he said.

    I’m wondering if their checks are bigger if the Union dues aren’t being collected, even if they have to pay for thier benefits.

  31. My neck-braced sister rushed into our house earlier, telling me that the phone line guys had cut her phone/computer and she had no service. When she asked them about the locate number, the idiot actually told her he didn’t need one unless he was in Manvel. I jumped up and we drove over. Idiot and Idiot Accomplice were busy trying to cover the phone line. Idiot showed me the repair epoxy, to show me he was repairing the damage. Sis checked her phone line, and it was still down. She rebooted the computer, still down. We checked the front house, and they had lost phone service as well. Idiot was scratching his head and still trying to tell me they didn’t have to have a utility locate number, now it was because they weren’t going 18″ deep. Right there in front of him I called 811 (the state-wide locate number) and asked for a supervisor. Supervisor assured me that (1) anytime the ground is broken, a locate is to be called in, and (2) the law is state-wide, not just for Manvel. He heard me on the call, and when I told him there were medical conditions in both houses, and that both units needed their phone service, I swear the guy started wissin’ bricks. He was facing someone who knew what she was talking about, and if there was a medical emergency such as, say, oh— my brother-in-law having a reaction to his chemo — the phone company could be held liable.

    I took sister and loaded some minutes on her cell phone, and Idiot assured me that he would have a technician come out and repair the damage he had caused.

    Now I have to research the law and see what the minimum depth is for the phone line. They moved the cable from where my sister had put it when it was originally hooked up. (The procedure is that the cable is hooked up, the cable laid on top of the ground, then they hire cheaper contractors to “bury it where it lies”.) Sis had moved the cable before it was buried, which meant he wasn’t even following his orders – to bury it where he found it. (The line should have been run through the neighbor’s yard – it’s their phone line being installed.) This means they put it right where a future fence is hopefully going to be installed, and they wouldn’t move it back even when sis tried to explain the problem.

    Wissin’ wissin’ idiots.

  32. I can’t tell you how many telephone company contractors have dug up my water lines. They never call for locates. They know few people are going to go up against telephone co. lawyers.

  33. #45 Do politicians have to submit to drug testing prior to taking office?

    …Didn’t think so. Some people will buy anything.

  34. I stand to be corrected, but I think the law is anytime you’re digging deeper than 16″ you must call for a utility line locate. When I call for locates-and I do several times a week- they always ask if I’m digging deeper than 16 inches.

  35. #45 Do politicians have to submit to drug testing prior to taking office?

    …Didn’t think so. Some people will buy anything.

    Can we take welfare recipients off the rolls every two years if we want?

    Didn’t think so.

    Some folks don’t think things all the way through.

  36. You people are not buying enough Chevy Volts. Sales were down 40 (!) units (or 12.5% !) in Feb.

    GM sold 321 of the new plug-in hybrid electric vehicles in January and 281 in February. The numbers were released shortly after GM announced plans to make the Volt available nationwide by the end of the year.

    To give you an idea of how appallingly miserable that is:

    Overall, Chevrolet reported a February sales climb of 69 percent in February when compared to the same month last year. Nearly half of the month’s 142,919 vehicles sold were four-cylinder models.

    But fear not! We have a plan!

    According to Senator Stabenow’s website, her proposed legislation, known as the “Charging America Forward Act” (S.298), “will provide consumers with a rebate worth up to $7500 for plug-in electric vehicles at the time of purchase.”

  37. Some people will buy anything.

    I’d like to stop them from buying drugs with my money. If they wanna go all libertarian and smoke weed in their mama’s basement all day, they can earn the money to buy it themselves. All in all, if you’re buying drugs, you should have all the essential basics more than covered.

    So you’re in favor of using government handouts to buy drugs? I thought libertarians disliked even the notion of government handouts.

  38. #52 Pyro

    I thought libertarians disliked even the notion of government handouts.

    So you still think bob is a libertarian? He just can’t stand the thought of illegal drugs being denied to anyone…

  39. #45 Do politicians have to submit to drug testing prior to taking office?

    …Didn’t think so. Some people will buy anything.

    Can welfare recipients get government money without me have any input about it at all?

    Thought so.

  40. At this point I’m losing count. I’m not sure if it’s the third or fourth invite I’ve received to a 21st b-day bash from one of the kids that used to hang here after school. It’s been awesome to observe their growth from their care free (and sometimes careless) teenage days, to a time of responsible adultery.

  41. #50, 52, 53, I’m more libertarian than the parasitic politicians that keep proposing such superficial and unrealistic legislation. It will not pass. Junk bills like that are proposed to pander to folks like you. And it seems to work, every time.

    Is serious welfare reform a good thing? Sure! Is this serious welfare reform? Hardly. It’s simple political pandering.

  42. What a complete “Slime Ball”
    Schumer coordinates Dem budget attack on GOP.

    He told the group to make sure they label the GOP spending cuts as “extreme.”

    “I always use extreme, Schumer said. “That is what the caucus instructed me to use.”

    Someone must have finally told Schumer that the media were listening and he stopped talking midsentence.

  43. #45 Pyro:
    The last paragraph in your linkie thingie:

    “I will not move the bill until I get a bill that I can get those who are adamantly opposed to it, maybe not to necessarily say they’re in support of the bill, but to go neutral on [it],” says Sacia.

    The guy has the right idea but is he a complete stranger to the concept of TESTICULAR FORTITUDE??
    He wants to wait until those who are adamantly opposed to go neutral, WT_?? How could any logical, responsible, reasonable person be opposed to drug testing for welfare recipients?

    Sacia says House Bill 11 is imperfect, but is getting better. He says one of the bills’ amendments will eventually address how to pay for the drug tests, but the specifics have yet to be hammered out.

    Take the cost of the testing out of their welfare checks; problem solved. If they don’t want to pay for the test/and or take the test then no check. What makes this even better is that they will have to show up at the local welfare office and present valid ID; this will go a long way to purge the welfare roles of the ghosts sapping the system. Once again, if there is no compliance there is no check; perhaps the stigma of being on welfare, plus the inconvenience will cause some to get off the federal teat.

  44. #45 Do politicians have to submit to drug testing prior to taking office?

    …Didn’t think so. Some people will buy anything.

    Will the welfare recipient have to take a drug test in order to get a job?

    Thought so.

    Will the employer’s insurance company require the drug test to insure that new employees don’t present a danger to themselves or others?

    Thought so.

    Will not getting a job keep them on welfare?

    Thought so.

    Is keeping people on welfare cruel?

    Thought so.

    Will it increase the cost and size of government?

    Thought so.

  45. #58

    Take the cost of the testing out of their welfare checks; problem solved.

    I’m sure the lobbyists for the drug testing industry would love that idea too. After all, it’s far better to take our tax dollars and feed them to a company than use them to feed the kids of the poor, right?

  46. Junk bills like that are proposed to pander to folks like you. And it seems to work, every time.

    Is serious welfare reform a good thing? Sure! Is this serious welfare reform? Hardly. It’s simple political pandering.

    blah blah blah

    “This bill is peanuts and/or is something that has an appeal outside of ‘enlightened’ circles, therefore it’s pandering.”

    I still think it’s a great idea and is actually something I’ve thought for years. I also think that if you get caught buying stuff with your food stamps (or whatever the replacement is) that is on the prohibited list, you should lose all benefits, if not for life, then for several years. I also think that if you are able-bodied that you should only be able to receive benefits for a fairly short period of time (<2 years). I also think that an effort should be made to catch those who defraud the system, e.g., make recipients collect at least one check per quarter in person, showing proper identification, check their dwellings periodically for things like high-dollar electronics (if they can afford those, they can buy their own groceries).

  47. #56 Bob 420 and counting: Insisting that my tax dollars that go to welfare payments isn’t spent on dope or boooooze is not political pandering, it is responsible government. Just as it would be considered responsible parenting not to fund your child’s drug or alcohol habit. If those on uncle sugar’s welfare tab can’t walk the straight and narrow path of responsibility, then they should be removed. This is one of the many cases where the total money involved is not near as important as the principle. This WILL SAVE MONEY if my procedures outlined above are followed.
    1) Those that will not get off the dope will no longer get welfare.
    2) Those that do not go to the welfare office and submit to the drug testing, the cost of which is deducted from their check, will not get a check. This will go a long way to reduce the fraud in the system and could be used to help purge the voter rolls at the same time.
    3) Not having the mental crutch of dope to lean will likely increase boredom and the resultant drive to DO SOMETHING will result is some moving towards gainful employment and being a tax payer instead of being a societal leech/parasite.
    4) The PITA factor of having to go to the welfare office may actually induce some to come to the conclusion that it is just not worth it.

  48. #48 Bob:

    Do politicians have to submit to drug testing prior to taking office?

    Judging by their actions I suspect that many of them are using drugs right now. In some cases, drug use might cause an improvement.

    On the other hand, I have absolutely no objections to requiring drug testing for all elected officials – for that matter I think we should require all individuals who get a paycheck from a government entity to undergo drug testing.

  49. I’m sure the lobbyists for the drug testing industry would love that idea too. After all, it’s far better to take our tax dollars and feed them to a company than use them to feed the kids of the poor, right?

    We reach the heart of the matter. We can’t pay an eeeeeeevil corporation for anything. Nor can we say that certain behaviors are not what are expected of our citizenry. How about this:

    Drug use while on welfare is ipso facto child abuse, given that the welfare payments were intended for the nutritional needs of the children. In such a case, the recipient would not only forfeit benefits for a period of at least several years, he would also forfeit custody of his children.

  50. #60 Bob:

    After all, it’s far better to take our tax dollars and feed them to a company than use them to feed the kids of the poor, right?

    That has to be the lamest straw man you have ever put up. The position is assuming a totally false and ridiculous comparison, the money in question is going to dope not groceries. The people taken off the rolls because they fail the wiz quiz will more than pay for the testing. There are drug store home test kits that can be had at full retail for around $40, just imagine the volume discount that the feds could get for all the millions of kits to test the millions on welfare. I wish there were a test that could detect alcohol consumption in the last week. If you take away the luxury of drugs and alcohol from the welfare crowd, you will have fewer of them. If you make poverty really uncomfortable you will have fewer people in poverty.

  51. Bob: Remember that I am on your side when it comes to decriminalization of dope as the crime factor just makes it more expensive and enriches the worst elements in humanity. The illegality does little to deter usage. That being said, DON’T ASK ME TO PAY FOR YOUR DOPE!

  52. The Facts:
    Better than 95% of all drug test “failures” detect cannabis use only.

    The major focus of the WoD is cannabis use. And most of the arrests are for simple possession.

    Contrary to expensive government propaganda, cannabis is NOT a “gateway” drug.

    Hair/urine tests can only detect the presence of the byproducts of metabolized THC, and can not detect if a person is under the influence of that chemical at the time the sample is taken.

    Evidence of cannabis use remains in the urine for 2 weeks, and in the hair for three months.

    Fewer and fewer employers are requiring pre-employment drug testing, except those that are under big government mandate to do so.

    It’s a stupid bill, intended to pander to people who unquestioningly bite the government’s garbage propaganda, hook, line and sinker.

  53. #66 I appreciate that, and am glad that we agree. But I’m still against this type of legislation because it’s far short of serious reform, and very superficial.

    Why not mandate that anyone that gets anything from the government be alcohol and tobacco free as well?

  54. Better than 95% of all drug test “failures” detect cannabis use only. Maybe because upwards of 95% of drug use is weed? Besides, what’s this have to do with the topic?

    The major focus of the WoD is cannabis use. And most of the arrests are for simple possession. What’s this have to do with the topic?

    Contrary to expensive government propaganda, cannabis is NOT a “gateway” drug. What’s this have to do with the topic?

    Hair/urine tests can only detect the presence of the byproducts of metabolized THC, and can not detect if a person is under the influence of that chemical at the time the sample is taken. However, if you have a professional stoner, he can be buzzing so loud you can hear him AND have the metabolites in his system from when he got wasted yesterday. And the day before. And the day before. And the day before….

    Evidence of cannabis use remains in the urine for 2 weeks, and in the hair for three months. So we won’t have to test as often. Winner!

    Fewer and fewer employers are requiring pre-employment drug testing, except those that are under big government mandate to do so. What’s this have to do with the topic?

    It’s a stupid bill, intended to pander to people who unquestioningly bite the government’s garbage propaganda, hook, line and sinker. If you want to fund welfare recipient drug use, why don’t you go do it? I don’t want to. Period.

    Bob, the simple fact is that welfare benefits are given to people so they can be fed, housed, and clothed. They’re not so some idiot can get wasted with someone else picking up the tab.

    side note – I’ve only had one job in the last 25 years that did not require drug testing. The last time I went in for one around the end of last year, I asked the guy how many people fail. His answer was IIRC about half or so. These are people who have either been offered a job and it’s pre-employment screening, or they have a job and got randomly selected, or they have a job and had some sort of incident (motor vehicle accident in company vehicle, injury or other accident at work, etc.).

  55. Why not mandate that anyone that gets anything from the government be alcohol and tobacco free as well?

    Works for me.

  56. #70 I’m not at all surprised. Maybe tests for alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis should be conducted on you every time you drive down the road, or vote.

    Sound good?

  57. I’m sure the lobbyists for the drug testing industry would love that idea too. After all, it’s far better to take our tax dollars and feed them to a company than use them to feed the kids of the poor, right?

    You mean it might be possible that we could get people off of drugs and a job at drug testing companies at same time?

    Yah. You’re right.

    We’re cruel bastidges.

  58. Better than 95% of all drug test “failures” detect cannabis use only.

    If the pot the welfare recipients buy with welfare money can give their kids good, nutritional meals, you might have a point.

  59. Barf Kitty has discovered the pony tail holder from last week. It’s her favorite toy. She is going bonkers right now, “chasing” it all over the couch and up and down to the floor. She “loses” it under the blanket and gets all perky looking for it again.

    Easily amused, she is. But only for the little fuzzy pony tail holders. That, and she used to love foam hair rollers.

    PS: When she carries the fuzzy pth in her mouth, she looks a little like Hitler.

  60. First Bobby sez that we’re cruel bastidges b/c the money spent on drug tests won’t go the the welfare recipients kids.

    Then he sez “Let them eat pot.”

  61. Maybe tests for alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis should be conducted on you every time you drive down the road, or vote.

    Sound good?

    You really need to study your logic. Go over the “strawman” section a couple extra times.

  62. Why not mandate that anyone that gets anything from the government be alcohol and tobacco free as well?

    Amen and Amen. Preach on, brother!! I’m also good with no cable TV, no fast food, no vacations, no new cars, no non-essential items of any kind.

    If you want any of that stuff, get up off your lazy a$$ and get a job.

  63. no fast food, no vacations

    But then how would the bikini Burger King Trash(er) have made it to PCB to conduct her mayhem?

  64. My point remains that this is stupid feel good/do nothing legislation aimed precisely at an audience that will buy pretty much anything a parasite politician tries to sell them, based on exaggerations and emotion, instead of critical thinking.

    A drug test in no way proves that government money was used to purchase the product, that the person has a drug problem, or is not fit for employment. That is why fewer companies are using them. As usual, the free market is light years ahead of the government and the politicians.

    A hair/urine screen costs between $85 and $100 each. I know this because I was forced to pay for four of them during my custody case. It was a waste of money, and this stupid bill is a waste of time.

  65. Sarge, it all sounds hopeless when you line it up like that.

    Its not hopeless.

    But one of the things we need to do is to show folks that the arguments of folks like Bob are aimed more at preserving the number of people who would vote to legalize pot than it is at helping feed the children of the poor.

  66. My point remains that this is stupid feel good/do nothing legislation aimed precisely at an audience that will buy pretty much anything a parasite politician tries to sell them, based on exaggerations and emotion, instead of critical thinking.

    And my point is that guys like you are more interested in providing profit to drug pushers than you are at reforming the system or feeding hungry children.

  67. I’m sure the lobbyists for the drug testing industry would love that idea too. After all, it’s far better to take our tax dollars and feed them to a company than use them to feed the kids of the poor, right?

    And (once again) Bob show himself to be the true liberal that we all suspected. SJL could hardly have done a better job of switching from the WoD to the War on Poverty. And, Bob gives us a two-fer: End the war on drugs now ’cause it’s better for the children! And stop helping the eeeevviiiillllll corporations by purchasing their goods and services.

    That’s has got to be the most pathetically lame argument you’ve ever used Bob.

  68. My point remains that this is stupid feel good/do nothing legislation aimed precisely at an audience that will buy pretty much anything a parasite politician tries to sell them, based on exaggerations and emotion, instead of critical thinking.

    A drug test in no way proves that government money was used to purchase the product, that the person has a drug problem, or is not fit for employment.

    I take virtually everything the government does with a healthy dose of skepticism. I still don’t see why making an effort to keep welfare recipients off drugs is so horrible.

    Money is fungible. “Proving” whether the money used to purchase drugs is not necessary. Besides, I don’t care if they are given the drugs. If welfare is intended to be a “help up” and not a “hand out”, then teaching these people how to be responsible is essential. Using drugs (especially since they do happen to still be illegal) is not what responsible people who are trying to hold down a job do.

    Once these people get high enough on the career ladder (past laborer), they will most likely be required to take a drug test, because they’ll most likely start operating machinery. Drug tests will be occasionally required from then until (hopefully) that person enters a more professional type of position (even then, it will likely continue to be the case).

  69. #81 Bob: Money is fungible. Any money spent by a welfare parasite on drugs, alcohol, tobacco, etc, is money that could have and should have been spent more wisely for say FOOD, CLOTHING, AND SHELTER.

    My point remains that this is stupid feel good/do nothing legislation aimed precisely at an audience that will buy pretty much anything a parasite politician tries to sell them, based on exaggerations and emotion, instead of critical thinking.

    There seems to be an extreme lack of critical thinking on your part concerning THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE OF WELFARE AND DOPE.

  70. #81 Bob

    A drug test in no way proves that government money was used to purchase the product

    It’s a simple concept, Bob. Focus. If they are on welfare, they should have no “spare” money to spend on drugs.

  71. #81 Bob:

    My point remains that this is stupid feel good/do nothing legislation aimed precisely at an audience that will buy pretty much anything a parasite politician tries to sell them, based on exaggerations and emotion, instead of critical thinking.

    Or maybe it’s intelligent forward thinking legislation, which will probably not pass, but is nevertheless appealing to fans of limited government who want to see fewer welfare dollars handed out, especially to wastrels who aren’t really serious about getting a job or fixing their financial state.

    A drug test in no way proves that government money was used to purchase the product, that the person has a drug problem, or is not fit for employment.

    It proves that a person who does not have the wherewithall to do so is wasting money on non-essentials and then asking me to fund their essential purchases. The fact that they’re begging for my money while spending theirs on drugs PROVES that they have a problem.

    That is why fewer companies are using them. As usual, the free market is light years ahead of the government and the politicians.

    The government and businesses are not the same thing. They operate differently, have different goals and objectives and use different value judgements. Businesses can evaluate their employees in any way they choose.

    A hair/urine screen costs between $85 and $100 each. I know this because I was forced to pay for four of them during my custody case. It was a waste of money, and this stupid bill is a waste of time.

    Now we come to the crux of the matter. Dealing with a few anger issues, Bob?

  72. #88 Tedtam

    PTH – pony tail holder

    Ah, I somehow took it to be “pith”… As in maybe the PTH was chewed up and pithy??

  73. A drug test in no way proves that government money was used to purchase the product.

    Ummm—–

    It does prove they are using money they could have otherwise spent on thier children was spent on something so unneccessary to thier well being as to be a greater luxury than a fast car or a bass boat.

    Its the equivalent of buying your self a steak while your children are eating Ramen Noodles.

  74. #82 If you can state a rational and factual case for big government prohibiting cannabis (and spending $50B a year in the failed attempt) I’ll be happy to read it.

    #85 Can you back up your argument?

    That’s has got to be the most pathetically lame argument you’ve ever used Bob.

    In order to conclude that bills like this are wise, one must assume that what the government tells you about drug use is true (not always the case) and that the exaggerated stereotypes the politicians benefit from are also true.

    Call me all the cute little names y’all like, but I know superficial political pandering when I see it, and this one is a classic example of using emotion and misinformation to pander to the easily persuaded. Apparently (and sadly) it works, yet again.

    That bill is a sorry excuse for real welfare reform, but some of you guys lap it up like a cat with a bowl of milk.

  75. Will the city budget be able to handle the cost of all the lawsuits involving Prop. 1, the drainage fee? Because the city was able to fool the voters with their deceptive wording of Prop. 1, there will be all kinds of legal challenges as to who is exempt and who is not from paying the TAX, I mean fee. Good work city government, waste more of those tax dollars you don’t have.

  76. #82 If you can state a rational and factual case for big government prohibiting cannabis (and spending $50B a year in the failed attempt) I’ll be happy to read it.

    Like the man said, Bob, focus.

    We’re talking about wlefare recipients spending money on dope instead of thier children’s welfare.

    Or are you saying that you’d be in favor of checking for drugs if pot was legal?

    If so, man you are one sick puppy. It would mean that you are so friggin selfish that you’d rather poor kids daddies spent their money on pot than on them because you can’t make your pet political project as popular as you think it should be.

  77. In order to conclude that bills like this are wise, one must assume that what the government tells you about drug use is true (not always the case) and that the exaggerated stereotypes the politicians benefit from are also true.

    You know what? I’ll make it a little clearer and remove drugs from the picture.

    Someone on welfare who goes to the track to play the ponies (or dogs) should no longer receive benefits.

    Someone on welfare who is a big motocross enthusiast who buys motorcycle parts and gas for weekend rallies should no longer receive benefits.

    Welfare is for people to feed, shelter, and clothe themselves. Period. If they have extra discretionary income to indulge in expensive hobbies and similar activities, then they obviously have too much money, so their benefits should be reduced accordingly. If what they are doing is illegal and is virtually certain to render themselves unemployable, then they should be cut off altogether.

  78. #98 Sarge, give me the facts. What percentage of welfare recipients use drugs? What percentage of the money they receive is spent on drugs? How much on alcohol or tobacco. Can you? (Didn’t think so…)

    I’ve stated again and again that this legislation is a sorry excuse for real welfare reform, and nobody has offered any real evidence to the contrary.

    But yet, something stupid like this comes along that increases government power, with no factual statement of cost/benefit, you’re all for it.

    Think for yourself. I know you don’t trust the politicians. Why trust this one?

  79. #98 Sarge, give me the facts. What percentage of welfare recipients use drugs?

    How many children have to suffer before you’ll say its too many?

  80. Or are you saying that you’d be in favor of checking for drugs if pot was legal?

    He’s wrapped so far around the axle, he’s not sure anymore.

  81. This is the first time I’ve said this on the internet, and it will be the last.

    Bob, you suck.

    You are one selfish and cruel bastidge and what makes it worse, for the past couple of years, you’ve done your dead level best to portray us as selfish and cruel bastidges.

  82. Somebody hand me some gander sauce.

    I’m all out of the stuff I was using on the goose.

    Works just as good, though.

  83. Reply to No. 37: Wagonburner forgot the captions for this picture so nobody knows what it means. My apologies if these “Top Ten” captions are incorrect or do not express the intent of the picture but here goes:

    1) I’m trying to hide from Moochelle’s butcher.

    2) How come it says on his “teleprompter” to “eat more beef”?

    3) At the rate Moochelle is eating, I’ll be extinct.

    4) Moochelle, why don’t you try some fish?

    5) Doesn’t Moochelle know that I’m not good for her.

    6) Hey, how about some “tongue”?

    7) Moochelle in the morning.

    8) Ghadafi in drag.

    9) Where’s that creamery in Brennan?

    10) I’m Elsie’s cousin.

    Well, one of these should explain that picture, maybe?

  84. Well, it’s about 4:20, so maybe I do suck.

    Saying that someone “sucks” is a sorry excuse for a rational argument. But I’m used to that.

  85. What percentage of welfare recipients use drugs?

    Enough to matter?

    Who cares? The savings from one recipient removed from the rolls would pay for oodles of tests on others.

    The value of the object lesson should not be overlooked. Most recipients come to think of welfare payments as their God-given right. Seeing some number of people get kicked off the program might give them some food for thought.

  86. Simple & Tedtam

    I am planning a trip to Italy in the near future and I have ascertained that there are older “state” run lines along with newer Eurorail lines aka high speed trains. It is easy to book a ticket from Rome to Naples. I am having a more difficult time locating train and bus schedules going south from Naples to Pompeii, Salerno, and Paestum. I am trying hard to avoid renting a car.

    I would much rather take public transportation in Europe primarily due to its ease of use and the fact that I do not have to find a parking space. Even though the Europeans have excellent rail service, I believe they would have to make significant upgrades to their infrastructure to accommodate even more people utilizing mass transit.

  87. Shannon & Tedtam

    My phone line is buried about 1″ below the surface. Mine runs along the fence line before making a diagonal cut towards the house. I have cut my own phone line twice with a tiller because I decided to put a garden on top of the phone line’s path. Both times I called the phone company and they ran a new line from the box to the house free of charge.

  88. #108 All emotion, but absolutely no facts to back it up. No facts whatsoever. This is delusional authoritarianism at its finest.

    Who cares? The savings from one recipient removed from the rolls would pay for oodles of tests on others.

    The value of the object lesson should not be overlooked. Most recipients come to think of welfare payments as their God-given right. Seeing some number of people get kicked off the program might give them some food for thought.

    I might partake now and then, but I’ll never smoke weed with Willie again.

  89. Bob,

    I agree with your libertarian outlook in general and if you want to smoke some reefer.. well feel free to light one up, however you are WRONG on one point.

    An employer has a right to maintain a drug free workplace and contrary to your belief that employers are decreasing drug testing; they are doing it more and using more indirect methods to detect problems.

    We used to have a 50% random sampling policy at my workplace. We do work on Pipelines and Offshore Platforms, which places us under the DOT rules that also apply to Airline Pilots, Maritime Workers, Train Engineers, and Truck Drivers. The sampling rate is down to 10% for one simple fact. We caught a lot of folks initially, but after a little purging we got to the point where no one was coming up positive.

    I do not view the testing as onerous or an invasion of my privacy. It is a simple business deal. I have agreed to stay drug free and my employer has agreed to pay me a really great salary. I could choose to wait tables or work at any number or fast food occupations, but I really like the 401K and health benefits versus the free take home french fries.

    You are right. We do catch mostly pot users, but this is because pot will stay in your system for a long time and especially if you are packing a few extra pounds of body fat.
    That doobie you smoked two weeks ago can show up in a test. I would mention that the DOT test only looks for “toxic” levels whereas the additional testing mandated by the oil companies (our valued customers) looks for trace amounts. We will terminate on trace amounts and a “Contact High” from a concert will not be accepted as an excuse.

    Good supervisors can spot the use of other drugs and our employer can demand a drug test for “cause” and we do! This sort of evens things out for the coke heads.

    I will probably enjoy a pocket rocket after I retire, but I will have a different business deal then. Accepting public assisted housing is a business deal. Want cheap housing….Don’t do drugs. Here is your incentive to work hard, learn, and save. Seems like everyone wins.

    Simple

  90. #111 Bob:

    You want facts? Try these:

    1. Drug use costs money. (Unless you can show me a drug dealer that consistently gives away his product)

    2. Welfare recipients aren’t using their own money. Not entirely. Some of it is ours. Extracted at the point of a gun by the government to pass out to others.

    3. As a net contributor to the government I see no reason why my contribution should be used, either completely, or in part, to fund the bad habits of someone else. Welfare money should be used for basic essentials only. Illicit drugs don’t qualify.

    4. Therefore this proposed legislation is, in theory, a good thing. It is irrelevant whether it can be passed, the concept is valid. It would still be valid if drug use itself was legal.

    5. Your past legal issues are completely irrelevant to the discussion. Also irrelevant are discussions about starving children, corporate profits, and the price of tea in China. I know it’s tough, but try to stay on point here.

  91. Simple:

    Accepting public assisted housing is a business deal. Want cheap housing….Don’t do drugs. Here is your incentive to work hard, learn, and save. Seems like everyone wins.

    Well stated! I would say that it’s not just public assisted housing – it’s any kind of government assistance at all. And I might add – that includes college loans and grants.

  92. 109 TexMo

    Wait until you ride a city bus during evening rush hour. Folks are crammed on the buy in literal standing room only.

    Some days you are pressed against some latter day Sophia Loren and some days it is Earnest Borgnine.

    I would suggest waiting out the rush hour at one of the many side walk cafes and engage in some world class “looking”. The young Italian women spend a lot on “La Moda” and I always found it amazing to see some young lady dressed to the nines riding her Vespa into work with an expensive silk scarf draped across her face to protect the makeup.

    I would also like to mention that Rome and Florence are very very polluted with exhaust fumes. The summer months can be very brutal to the sinuses; this is especially true when there is no breeze.

    Simple

  93. bob – I’m typing slowly so you can keep up.

    Assistance to those in dire need can be seen as a legitimate function of government. Since these programs do, in fact, exist we must deal with them. I am ok with providing temporary assistance to the truly needy. I am willing to feed, clothe, and shelter them; I am NOT ok with paying for their recreational pharmaceuticals or any other expensive pastimes.

    n.b. – If you want to go out and smoke your lawn, go for it.

  94. Simple

    I generally try to get to whichever side of town I need to be on before the evening rush hour. However, I have been trapped like a sardine in the Brussels Metro.

    Regarding exhaust fumes, I am sure they can not be worse than Casablanca. I was talking to a Moroccan college last week about used cars. He is looking to purchase a used car from Spain or France. He is willing to pay 7,000 Euros for the car plus about 6,000 Euros in taxes to the Moroccan government. He pretty much said that the cars sold to Morocco are substandard. I asked him about pollution control devices and he responded, “What pollution control devices?” That explains why brand new diesel cars will still emit plumes of sooty, black smoke. Brand new diesel cars in Europe do not emit plumes of sooty, black smoke.

  95. So Bob;

    Lets just say that there’s only 100,000 kids on welfare in this nation of 330 million people3. QWe all know its higher than that, but lets use that number because it ius low and easy to work with.

    Now lets say that the parents of only 1% of that number are using the welfare money intended for thier children to buy drugs. We all know THAT percentage is low, but lets just use it because it is low and an easy number to work with.

    what you’re telling us that if those admittedly low numbers were true, you’d be happy with 1,000 kids watching daddy suck on a a bong instead of having supper instead of trying to do something about that, is that about it?

  96. I still think it’s a great idea and is actually something I’ve thought for years.

    Bull hockey! You’re nothing but an ignorant Red Dirt Rube that only thought about it after politicians lured you out from your catfish noodling expedition and told you it was a great idea. You’re not enlightened enough to think of such things. Now git back in yer hidey hole!

  97. Conjecture, speculation, and authoritarian Utopian fantasies are a poor substitute for facts and rational thinking. But they do wonders for opportunistic politicians at the polls.

  98. Utopian fantasies are a poor substitute for facts and rational thinking

    Sounds like you and that silly war on a plant.

  99. That has to be the lamest straw man you have ever put up.

    That’s has got to be the most pathetically lame argument you’ve ever used Bob.

    I don’t know guys. He’s set the bar pretty high (so to speak).

  100. #120
    Dang. You found me out. Who gave me away? The cocktail waitress in Bangkok? The cabbie in Havana? The masseuse in Berlin? The doorman in Buenos Aires? The street food guy in Bombay?

  101. 124 wagonburner says:
    March 29, 2011 at 5:34 pm
    #120
    Dang. You found me out. Who gave me away? The cocktail waitress in Bangkok? The cabbie in Havana? The masseuse in Berlin? The doorman in Buenos Aires? The street food guy in Bombay?

    Rocky Ricoco out at the old Same Place.

  102. For the last 1½ hours I’ve been busy posting a job at the TWC site. It’s a tedious, laborious process, prone to many mistakes and a real PITA.

    Kinda like Bob’s arguments about weed. My head almost ‘sploded reading his responses.

    Bob, you may not like the WOD, but the welfare legislation has nothing to do with your pet peeve. I agree with all the above arguments for drug testing welfare recipients. It’s not WOD thing, it’s a respect and responsibility thing. If you are too poor to pay for your own food, you are certainly too damn poor to buy drugs. With my tax money. And don’t give me that crap about “we don’t know if government money is paying for the drugs”. Not even you are so stupid you can’t see the problem with that argument.

    Since I know you are not that stupid – you have a few brain cells left, the only other options for trying to understand your stand on this are:
    A) You see WOD everywhere you look, even if it’s not there. I got news for you- WOD is like racism. It’s just not that big a deal to most of us, and only people who are personally invested in those topics keep seeing it and accusing others of their perpetuation of that particular evil.
    B) You just like to argue the freedom for anyone to buy cannabis, no matter what.
    C) You just like to argue, period.
    D) You are not really Bob42, you are evil Bob42. The real Bob42 is being held hostage in a foreign country, being tortured by having to listen to alternating speeches from TBO and Reagan

    Speaking of torture, I have to go to a meeting tonight that I really don’t want to go to. I’d skip it except that I’ve been snookered into judging the Beard, Moustache, and Goatee Contest tonight. I get to be part of the light relief in a sea of discussion on new plumbing codes and licensing regulations. /sighing heavily

    /dragging my feet down the hallway…..

  103. And Bobby can’t even “conjecture” whether 1000 children watch daddy suck on a bong instead of getting supper is too many, even though he knows the real number is higher than that.

    Brave Sir Robinert

  104. Apparently social conservatives share some aspects with big government loving zero tolerance liberals; Intentional ignorance of facts, and growing government based on emotion alone. That’s probably why the politicians on both wings of the bird successfully exploit such tendencies.

    It works.

  105. #100 –

    Think for yourself. I know you don’t trust the politicians. Why trust this one?

    AND

    #121 –

    Conjecture, speculation

    Bob my fondness for the occasional herbage aint in question NOR does it make me hallucinate – I do STILL believe my own eyes.

    More than several times (like once a week for 3-4 YEARS) when I lived in Hill County (at the time the lowest per capita income county in TX)………….I’ve sat in the grocery store parking lot in Hillsboro and watched not only .50 cents-on-the-dollar exchanges of CASH for food stamps but IMMEDIATE drug deals being made with aforementioned cash right after it was exchanged – there were even waiting lines for each transactor at times.

    IMHO and based on my eyewitness observations I’d postulate that mandating drug testing as the primary caveat for receiving ANY government assistance (with the exception of WIC……………..I like dat govt cheese)………………would SAVE more cash of OUR TAX DOLLARS than you could or would ever imagine.

  106. Bob,

    My own daughter is an addict and she had no reservations about cashing in the Social Security check intended for her daughter and using the proceeds for drugs. This is one of many reasons that the State of Texas has made Ms Simple and I parents again.

    I can tell you from my informal and totally unsubstantiated poll taken with other grandparents sitting on the benches in the public parks; that most of them are parents to the grandchildren because of drug use by the children. Go and check for yourself someday! It sure isn’t the way that I expected to spend my retirement years — raising a teenager.

    It is an impractical and futile hope that all will use drugs only for recreational purposes and keep work-business separate from pleasure. I agree that locking users up is not a solution, but that does not mean we should abandon all disincentives.

    – Loss of Public Housing
    – Loss of College Grants (too many sober kids needing support..easy call this one)
    – Loss of Welfare
    – A life of menial and low paying jobs

    People will still use drugs despite these disincentives, but you know what…”To Hades with them”

    Simple

  107. Last night, I had this dream about Cindy and Tracie and…

    …they kicked your stoned ass out of their love nest?

    …they dressed you up like a lipstick lesbian?

    …they extracted your seed in order to inseminate themselves?

  108. #129 TT

    judging the Beard, Moustache, and Goatee Contest

    How about the Best Butt Crack contest? Didja get that one too? :)

  109. Last night, I had this dream about Cindy and Tracie and…

    …they kicked your stoned ass out of their love nest?

    …they dressed you up like a lipstick lesbian?

    …they extracted your seed in order to inseminate themselves?

    Robbed you of your Precious Bodily Essence?

    From a quality motion picture:
    General Jack D. Ripper: I can assure you it has not recurred, Mandrake. Women uh… women sense my power and they seek the life essence. I, uh… I do not avoid women, Mandrake.
    Group Capt. Lionel Mandrake: No.
    General Jack D. Ripper: But I… I do deny them my essence.

  110. “zero tolerance liberals progressives”

    At least in theory, that’s some kind of oxymoron.

    Yer welcome.

  111. #23;

    Bachmann 2012, or else!

    Wow. That didn’t take long for Bob to attack Bachman based upon her religious beliefs.

  112. #140 Pyro

    …they extracted your seed in order to inseminate themselves?
    Or for some other reason….

    Yes — as femmes, Bob’s favorite duo might be interested in the hair treatment or anti-aging cosmetic aspects of said seed…

  113. #71;

    Maybe tests for alcohol, tobacco, and cannabis should be conducted on you every time you drive down the road, or vote.

    Yeah, wagonburner. I’m tired of paying for you to buy your own gas and to cast your own ballot. Enough is enough already!

    :)

    (Talk about an ability for bob to blog about non-related topics, sheesh)

  114. #145 Darren, I said nothing about the candidate’s beliefs and I do not care what she believes.

    Your take on it speaks volumes.

  115. bob #149;

    So why the diss on Bachman based on characterizing her as a gay fear monger? What has she politicized that mounts to fearing gays? If you can’t show that then the only thing left is that she opposes gay marriage and that is undoutably based primarily upon her religious beliefs.

    I do not care what she believes

    Also undoubtful is that you do not like that she is not pro-gay marriage.

  116. Here, bob, may I help?

    On November 20, 2003, Bachmann and Representative Mary Liz Holberg proposed a constitutional amendment that would bar the state from legally recognizing same-sex marriage.[25] In 2004, Bachmann and a coalition of religious leaders announced plans for what was billed as a “Minnesota for Marriage” rally.[26] Bachmann’s efforts to get the same-sex marriage ban on a Minnesota referendum ballot in 2004 ultimately failed. She resurrected her proposal for a same-sex marriage ban amendment in March 2005[27] In April 2005, the State Senate rejected Bachmann’s proposed amendment again.[28]

    Was this fear mongering? She did loose the election afterall.

    Bachmann supports both a federal and state constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage and any legal equivalents.[120] In support of a constitutional amendment she proposed to ban same-sex marriage,[121][122] Bachmann said that the gay community was specifically targeting children and that “our children… are the prize for this community, they are specifically targeting our children”.[123] In 2004, the Star Tribune reported that Bachmann said of people who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgendered, “We need to have profound compassion for people who are dealing with the very real issue of sexual dysfunction in their life and sexual identity disorders”.[124][125] Bachmann has praised the controversial Christian youth ministry You Can Run But You Cannot Hide International, appearing as a keynote speaker at their fundraisers.[126][127][128]

    (Emphasis mine)

    There, bob. That was fear mongering against the gays, right? They’re not “specifically targetting our children”. They just want to live their lives, right?

    (This is all assuming arruacy in the reporting.)

    WIKI LINK

  117. #151 Darren, very good. I agree.

    …that she opposes gay marriage and that is undoutably based primarily upon her religious beliefs.

    I don’t give a hoot if a politician believes in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Thor, Zeus, or whatever. That’s a personal matter, and I deeply respect individuals’ rights to believe whatever they choose.

    You may disagree, but I think that religious persuasions should not affect the laws of the land.

  118. Darren, regarding your avatar pic: I assume that is you, and have wondered if you are wearing headphones, maybe ear protectors, or is it a Princess Leia hairdo? :)

    /duck & cover

  119. mharper;

    Seriously, though. When gravatars first came into play I knew I needed a conservative one. The ones I have with my dogs are to whimpy, with my family are too American (I wanted a conservative one; not universally accepted), and those with my wife are (in addition to what I said about the photos with my kids) not always appropriate for general audiences. So I settled on the pic that was takien at the shooting range my father-in-law manages in New Mexico. It was windy and cold as well as sunny that day. I like the pic, though. It looks better fully blown.

  120. You may disagree, but I think that religious persuasions should not affect the laws of the land.

    Even if they are based upon us being endowed by our Creator with certain inalianable rights?

    I don’t give a hoot if a politician believes in the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Thor, Zeus, or whatever.

    So if an Atheist proposes that all references to God in the public square be removed, you’d oppose that?

  121. Darren, there’s a huge difference between the “public square” and the authority of government. I support your freedom of expression in the public square. Really, I do.

    But I can not support you, Bachmann, or anybody else empowering government to impose their religious beliefs on others.

Comments are closed.