I read this, barfo, and thought of you.

[Denny Crane]

It'd be like your own kind of tea party.

'Government Doesn't Suck' march planned


(the problem is, yes it does suck!)

 

[barfo]

(the problem is, yes it does suck!)

That sort of black or white view just isn't really very realistic. It both sucks and it doesn't suck, and everything in between. It sucks when the pentagon buys a $1000 toilet seat. It doesn't suck when the fire department comes and puts out your burning house.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

That sort of black or white view just isn't really very realistic. It both sucks and it doesn't suck, and everything in between. It sucks when the pentagon buys a $1000 toilet seat. It doesn't suck when the fire department comes and puts out your burning house.

barfo

If it costs more to put out the fire than the house does, then yeah it still sucks. Not that govt. is the only entity that could be responsible for putting out fires, nor is that anything to do with the federal government needing to be so large.

 

[andalusian]

That sort of black or white view just isn't really very realistic. It both sucks and it doesn't suck, and everything in between. It sucks when the pentagon buys a $1000 toilet seat. It doesn't suck when the fire department comes and puts out your burning house.

I generally agree. It is clear, however, that the government in this country has gotten too big and too complicated for it's own good (and it's not exactly a brand new thing, it's been like this for quite some time).

 

[andalusian]

nor is that anything to do with the federal government needing to be so large.

Just to be fair, many of the state governments are just as bad or close to it. California is actually a prime example...

 

[Denny Crane]

Just to be fair, many of the state governments are just as bad or close to it. California is actually a prime example...

Agreed. They should probably just use some % of the property taxes collected to pay for police and fire, instead of using it to buy junkets to the bahamas and other nice places.

 

[barfo]

If it costs more to put out the fire than the house does, then yeah it still sucks.

Interesting theory. So the government should spend up to the cost of your house to save it from fire, but not more than that? Not clear to me why 100% would be the right number - why should the government match your investment in your house?

Not that govt. is the only entity that could be responsible for putting out fires, nor is that anything to do with the federal government needing to be so large.

Oh, I'm sure I could come up with a federal example if I wanted to. Capturing Saddam, that's one you are in favor of, right? If not, put whatever example you like here.

barfo

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

Interesting theory. So the government should spend up to the cost of your house to save it from fire, but not more than that? Not clear to me why 100% would be the right number - why should the government match your investment in your house? barfo

When I was in the Navy and out to sea, if an item was deemed to be damaged and the cost to repair was more then 50% of replacing it, over the side it went- from swabs to helicopters.

 

[Denny Crane]

I see BP gets the gist of it. You'd be better off building a nice new house with the money after the place burns down.

Capturing Saddam, the military, is the BULK of the Constitution.

I load the Constitution in my browser and search for the word "Fire" and it doesn't appear once. "Police" doesn't appear either.

The word "health" doesn't either, let alone "health care."

"Welfare" appears twice, but with the word "General" (as in "General Welfare") before it.

Other words that don't appear in it:
"environment"
"green"
"cap and trade"
"medicine"
"medicare"
"housing"

About the only thing the govt. is doing new since 2009 that is actually in the Constitution is BORROWING.

 

[barfo]

I see BP gets the gist of it. You'd be better off building a nice new house with the money after the place burns down.

So you'd be in favor of the government building a new house for the person whose house burned? That seems to be what you are suggesting.
How realistic is this scenario, anyway? Does it really cost more than the cost of a house to fight a house fire?

Capturing Saddam, the military, is the BULK of the Constitution.

Great, so you agree with my example. So it is not the case that "government sucks".

I load the Constitution in my browser and search for the word "Fire" and it doesn't appear once. "Police" doesn't appear either.

The word "health" doesn't either, let alone "health care."

"Welfare" appears twice, but with the word "General" (as in "General Welfare") before it.

Other words that don't appear in it:
"environment"
"green"
"cap and trade"
"medicine"
"medicare"
"housing"

About the only thing the govt. is doing new since 2009 that is actually in the Constitution is BORROWING.

Exciting stuff. I'll bet these also don't appear in the Constitution: "antidisestablishmentarianism", "hot monkey love", "transistors", and "Sammy Davis, Jr."

barfo

 

[blazerboy30]

"Address the post, not the poster"

-Barfo

 

[barfo]

"Address the post, not the poster"

-Barfo

You do realize there is a difference between saying "you", and saying "you idiot"?

barfo

 

[blazerboy30]

You do realize there is a difference between saying "you", and saying "you idiot"?

barfo

Yes. What does that have to do with your famous quote?

 

[Denny Crane]

So you'd be in favor of the government building a new house for the person whose house burned? That seems to be what you are suggesting.
How realistic is this scenario, anyway? Does it really cost more than the cost of a house to fight a house fire?

The land doesn't burn, only the house. At $150/sq. ft, a 2000 sq. ft. house would cost $30,000. And yea, a house fire could easily cost that much to fight, when you consider all the costs.

And who says the taxpayer needs to replace the house? If the guy has insurance, then the insurance company pays for it.

Great, so you agree with my example. So it is not the case that "government sucks".

Great, I'm glad you think the Iraq War was a good thing. It must have been if you think govt. doesn't suck for it.

Exciting stuff. I'll bet these also don't appear in the Constitution: "antidisestablishmentarianism", "hot monkey love", "transistors", and "Sammy Davis, Jr."

barfo

Those things have nothing to do with the price of tea in china, nor anything to do with what the govt. does.

 

[barfo]

Yes. What does that have to do with your famous quote?

Do you really need me to explain the quote? It means "don't make personal attacks on other posters". Sorry if the meaning was unclear.

barfo

 

[blazerboy30]

Do you really need me to explain the quote? It means "don't make personal attacks on other posters". Sorry if the meaning was unclear.

barfo

Your post implies that you should calm down. I understand the meaning. I also realize you've never made a sarcastic post on S2.

Apology accepted.

 

[barfo]

Your post implies that you should calm down. I understand the meaning.

Ah, I see. You may understand a meaning (and it seems like a perfectly reasonable interpretation), but it isn't my meaning.
When I said it I meant no implication about calming down, because I didn't have any reason to think the poster was not calm.
Maybe some percentage of personal attacks come from posters getting upset, but I don't think they all do by a long shot.

I also realize you've never made a sarcastic post on S2.

Well, you got me there, I suppose.

barfo

 

[Denny Crane]

I read this, too, and thought of you barfo.


Scientists Find 'Liberal Gene'


Now that they've identified the gene, maybe they can come up with a cure. There's hope!