If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#121
|
|||
|
|||
Judah wrote: Let's see here... 14 hours per day x 7 days per week ================= 98 hours per week. That's pretty damned close... For the airplane it is. But, you said, and I quote, "The Airline pilot, who flies back and forth across the country twice a day, uses 100 hours of ATC time in about a week". |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
"Otis Winslow" wrote in message ... I would hardly call Libertarians very conservative. While the free market position could lead one to think that ... the general approach of us being able to do our own thing as long as we don't interfere with others exercising that same freedom is a long way away from the ultra conservative approach. They want to control our every action and make our moral judgements for us. Libertarians are as far to the right as it gets in America. The Libertarians I know .. like me .. believe in maximum liberty and minimum government to the extent that it's practical. The problem with the Republicrats is one wants to control our bank account and one wants to control our bedroom. With Libertarians .. at this point .. having little practical political power we're forced to choose between the extreme right or the extreme left. Libertarians are the extreme right. "Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ... "Otis Winslow" wrote in message .. . Go he http://www.libertarian.org/index2.html The Hoover Institute is the leading libertarian think tank in America and it is very conservative. In fact, outside the Hoover Institute libertarians have had little power in the US since FDR's Presidency began. Libertarians inside the Republican Party were responsible for the "balanced budget" we had a few years ago. "Tarver Engineering" wrote in message ... "C J Campbell" wrote in message ... So now you have 'conservatives' running around talking about property rights and states' rights Republicans have always supported States' rights, as that is the basis of a republic. (originally created to protect slavery) Democrats wanted the 3/5 law and Republicans were not willing to go to war over it and as long as libertarins could control the purse everyone was willing to leave things be for a while. and protecting large corporations while espousing populist principles. The libertarian wing (once Federalists) of the Republican Party insistthey address the issues of fiscal responsibility and a small central government, but libertarians are out of favor now due to their isolationist tendancies. And you have the 'liberals' running around trying to limit free speech and press, disarming the public, and supporting the worst thugs and despots imaginable in other countries in the name of 'diversity' and 'tolerance.' Racism has always been the Democrats' product. |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
"C J Campbell" wrote:
By those who, like Dan Luke, want to portray Jefferson as godless in order to further their own political agenda of excluding religious views from the political forum. I certainly would never claim Jefferson was godless. Rather, my point was that he would not pass the test for religious correctness of the religious right, whose political agenda is to enlist government in proselytizing their views. -- Dan C172RG at BFM |
#124
|
|||
|
|||
"Pete" wrote in message .com... In article , "Joe Young" wrote: "SNIP" I am not only pro choice, I am pro-abortion, I believe there should be a licensing procedure to ensure prospective parents are up to the task, physically, emotionally and financially. Until they can prove that, they should be chemically sterilized. Should we also perform a mecry killing on all of our seniors when they get to the point the can no longer take care of themselves. I can't speak for other, but if *I* get to the point that I "need to be taken care of," you won't need to mercy-kill me, I'll do it myself. Maybe we should also put down newborns with any physical, mental or genetic abnormalidies. Surely they would be more inconvenient at having an healthly, but unwanted baby. We kill millions of the latter in this country each year...so given your logic, why don't we just expand the practice a bit. Then we can ultimately expand the practice a bit more to encompase stupidity...and your ticket will be up. No it's not. IMO, a fetus is not a person until it's breathing on its own. I always am amused by men who oppose abortion, as if they know jack **** about being pregnant. You may find this amusing but I do not... It has nothing to do with knowing "jack **** about being pregnant", it has everything to do with understanding biology, reproductive physiology...you know science... Are you suggestion that since I have never been pregnant I could not possibly have an opinion on this matter...does that also apply to those that are for abortion? By the way, if you'd like to punch my ticket, you're welcome to take your best shot. I don't think I suggested I would like to "punch your ticket". I simply pointed out the obvious that if stupidity were a criteria for murder, you might need to be careful. |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
"Dan Luke" wrote in message ... "C J Campbell" wrote: By those who, like Dan Luke, want to portray Jefferson as godless in order to further their own political agenda of excluding religious views from the political forum. I certainly would never claim Jefferson was godless. Rather, my point was that he would not pass the test for religious correctness of the religious right, whose political agenda is to enlist government in proselytizing their views. With the left forcing the teaching of Darwin's "Origin of Species" in public schools, while knowing full well that it is scientifically false, makes your comments projection, Dan. |
#126
|
|||
|
|||
"Tarver Engineering" wrote: With the left forcing the teaching of Darwin's "Origin of Species" in public schools, while knowing full well that it is scientifically false, Bull****. This is exactly the kind of crap we are getting with the religious right's political agenda. Folks like Tarver are typical recruits. -- Dan C172RG at BFM |
#127
|
|||
|
|||
"Pete" wrote in message ... In article .net, "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote: "Pete" wrote in message .com... No, they want to tell you what you can and can't do in your bedroom, and with your own body. They want to tell you who you can marry, demand you go to church, but then you catch them in a motel room doin' what they said not to do. Conservatives are a bunch of lying liars. You've bought the propaganda. The basic difference between conservatives and liberals is their position on freedom. Conservatives are fer it, liberals are agin' it. Then why the fight against gay marriage? Why the fight against abortion? Why the fight against pr0n? pr0n? What? Are you a spammer? In case it has not occurred to you, most liberals also oppose gay marriage. John Kerry, for example, has gone on record as opposing it. Many liberals also oppose abortion, and there are a fair number of conservatives that support it. These issues do not cut cleanly down conservative/liberal ideological lines, despite efforts on both sides to portray them as such. There is nothing inherently liberal or conservative about abortion, gay marriage, or pornography. It is just flat-out wrong to say that conservatives want to tell you what to do in the bedroom. Most could not care less. It was not even an issue until Clinton tried to distract attention from his perjury and corruption charges by saying that conservatives were trying to regulate his behavior in the bedroom. They were not; they were interested in his perjury and corruption. Get over it. Clinton is gone, now. Actually, it was an issue before Clinton. Before Clinton it was the conservatives that were screaming that the liberals were trying to regulate bedroom behavior. When you have extremely anti-family groups like Planned Parenthood being allowed full access to the schools and children are being told in public schools to not only ignore what their parents are teaching them, but are expressly told not to tell their parents what is being taught there, well, I don't think you have to be on the lunatic fringe to have some objection to that. Like it or not, most parents feel they should have some say in how their children are raised. Most arguments that I have heard against gay marriage are basically economic. All those legal protections and benefits afforded married couples were instituted in order to provide a safe, stable environment for raising children. Providing those benefits to gay couples is both costly and extremely corrosive to the purpose of marriage. Those people who oppose gay marriage believe it is not worth the social and economic cost. Many of those who oppose gay marriage also feel that God does not approve of homosexuality, but those who think that way tend to believe that is a matter best left between the individuals involved and God. After all, if God doesn't like it, there is nothing any of us can do about it. He is free to send people to Hell or even destroy the whole country like he did Sodom. But I, for one, do not want to pay for Social Security benefits for married gay partners until I know where the money is coming from. I also want to know what effect that allowing gay marriages would have on an already fragile family structure. There are already too many children being raised in single parent families. History has shown time and again that this results in uncontrollable criminal activity. The prisons are full of parentless children. I am not about to support anything that is likely to make the situation even worse. The family infrastructure in this country is broken. I strongly believe that allowing gay marriages will sweep away whatever remnants remain of the concept of family. That is too high a price to pay in the name of 'tolerance.' |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
"Judah" wrote in message ... How, exactly, do the rich get richer without taking other people's assets? Here we have the crux of what passes for liberalism these days. Idiot. The assumption is that if you possess something, it must have been stolen from somebody else. It is astounding that liberals, who claim to be intellectuals, cannot see the blatant fallacy behind this argument. |
#129
|
|||
|
|||
"Dan Luke" wrote in message ... "Tarver Engineering" wrote: With the left forcing the teaching of Darwin's "Origin of Species" in public schools, while knowing full well that it is scientifically false, Bull****. Geological evidence demonstrates that if evolution occurs at all it does so in a single generation, but that evidence is more likely replacement of one species by another. Geological evidence also demonstrates that species come into being rapidly following a global cataclysm. Jay Gould's evolution reconciliation of Darwin's "Origin of Species" with hard physical evidence rapidly approaches Creation. Modern Cosmological theory suggests that the Universe is a vacuum fluctuation, completely consistent with Creation. Although the contrivance of an infinite number of parallel universes can be used to produce a secular solution. This is exactly the kind of crap we are getting with the religious right's political agenda. Folks like Tarver are typical recruits. A little science will drive you away from God, but a lot of science will bring you right back. Stop the teaching of religion as science in America's public schools. |
#130
|
|||
|
|||
Fair enough.
Please replace the words "Airline pilot" with "Airliner" in my original post. wrote in : Judah wrote: Let's see here... 14 hours per day x 7 days per week ================= 98 hours per week. That's pretty damned close... For the airplane it is. But, you said, and I quote, "The Airline pilot, who flies back and forth across the country twice a day, uses 100 hours of ATC time in about a week". |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AOPA Stall/Spin Study -- Stowell's Review (8,000 words) | Rich Stowell | Aerobatics | 28 | January 2nd 09 02:26 PM |
Juan Jiminez is a liar and a fraud (was: Zoom fables on ANN | ChuckSlusarczyk | Home Built | 105 | October 8th 04 12:38 AM |
Bush Pilots Fly-In. South Africa. | Bush Air | Home Built | 0 | May 25th 04 06:18 AM |
AOPA Sells-Out California Pilots in Military Airspace Grab? | Larry Dighera | Instrument Flight Rules | 12 | April 26th 04 06:12 PM |
Photographer seeking 2 pilots / warbirds for photo shoot | Wings Of Fury | Aerobatics | 0 | February 26th 04 05:59 PM |