This is bizarre, and has absolutely nothing to do with what Zoe said, and you are the one who brought 1981 into the picture, somehow thinking that it was a rebuttal to her statement about high gas prices and their effect on prices. When someone talks about high gas prices, claiming they have been high in the past isn’t really a rebuttal.
When Zoe claims that we are suffering from high gas prices now and I point out that gas prices have always been high at some point without long lasting damage then I don’t see the bizarreness you are claiming to experience.
I stated very clearly… VERY clearly that I feel no difference in gas prices now and in 1981.
My beef was mortgage rates at 18% and Iran’s Islamofascism and Russia’s nukes. I did not mention gas prices until Zoe stated that they suck here and now, which I disagree with, but you said it was the WORST YEAR TO COMPARE IT TO and I let you have it.
What would you like me to acquiesce to? I’ll do it if you so wish, so long as I do not have to lie to do it. Just please stop humping my leg about it. I am spilling my guts here and not quite understanding your point of contention.
You picked the year, I just responded to your lousy math:
Did you do it on purpose?
I purposely picked 1981, the year I first started working, because I knew I was making minimum wage then and it applied to me.
What spike was I supposed to have exploited? I do not see a spike sitting in the 1981 column. I see 1981 being very close to 1980, 1982 and 1983. I see a real bad spike in 1979… a year I chose as particularly demoralizing.
I could have used 1986 gas prices but I already related that 1986 was close to one of the greatest years ever in the realm of money growing on trees in the USA. Money is not flowing around and trickling down as much as it was in 1986 but I think things are doing just fine and not anywheres near a point where all those OP quotes apply.
This whole gas thing was brought up by Zoe who was trying to tell me that gas prices are making this country a “damaged country”. I didn’t think our country was damaged due to gas prices in 1981 and I don’t think our country is damaged now because of gas prices. If we are damaged with gas prices at a mere $3 a gallon then Canada and the UK are the walking freaking dead. I do not consider those countries as damaged countries.
I did not suggest you exploited anything. You seemed to think I chose the year for some nefarious reason. I merely pointed out that you were the one to choose 1981, not me.
Bullshit. There are no such things as “natural rights.”
I’m glad to hear you’re feeling better now, Dev. But we really can’t use your feelings as a weathervane for how the country’s going.
Why were you feeling so worried back in 1979? Were there Soviet troops skulking around your neighbourhood? Did Ronald Reagan personally show up in 1980 and tell them to get off your parents’ lawn?
Let’s face facts - your personal situation was probably unchanged between 1979 and 1980. Especially as you were only a child at the time. The fact that you felt better under a Reagan presidency then you did under a Carter presidency was not based on any objective facts.
And the fact that you’re feeling good under a Bush presidency really doesn’t mean a lot unless it’s based on objective facts as well. For every person who feels good about Bush there’s another person who felt good about Clinton or would have felt better about Gore or Kerry.
So some of us ignore feelings and make our judgements on facts. And the facts are in: the Bush administration really is doing some bad things. Just because they haven’t affected you or me personally doesn’t make them right. After all if they had affected you or me personally, we probably wouldn’t be having this conversation - we’d be in communicado in a secret prison cell or dead in a Middle Eastern street if we had personal experience with the downside of the Bush administration.
The Iranians releasing our hostages minutes after Reagan was sworn in was a pivotal point in my life regardless of the fact that I was years old.
That event wasn’t just feelings. That was a benchmark of one aspect of how the world works in real time.
And why do you think the Iranians timed their hostage release to coincide with Reagan’s inauguration?
Minor nitpick. You quoted me, but I didn’t pick the year.
I think the Iranians didn’t exactly time it that way on purpose. The Iranians made a last minute deal with the Carter administration knowing that Reagan would be a lot tougher to deal with. The Iranians held out until the last possible moment.
As for the tinfoilers take on it, well, I wouldn’t put it past Casey to have pulled off a conspiracy of such secrecy and perfection, but the lack of blabbers in over 25 years now is almost a nail in the coffin of any conspiracy theory. I refuse to read the bunny lady’s book on the matter because every single person who trusts her anonymous sources and theories always neglects to credit her with founding the conspiracy theory when discussing it.
And why, pray, might it not have been simply another “Fuck You!” for Jimmy Carter?
The Algiers Accord was signed on the 19th… almost the at the last minute before the Iranians would be forced to deal with Reagan.
I would think that if anything, the Iranians were trying to smokescreen their own wussiness of having to go down in history as the weenies who gave in to Carter rather than face Reagan.
Yeah, he sure showed them, din’t he? Bet they still cringe in Tehran at the name “Ollie North”!
Lt. Col. North was a coordinator of weapons sales through intermediates to Iran. I don’t know why any Iranian from any faction would cringe at his name, then or now.
The Sandanistas, however, being communists who lost more than just their battles due to more than their poor economic model, probably still chug some Pepto when The good Lt. Col is mentioned.
Hell, don’t have to tell me about Ronnie! When I was a boy, he’d be on the TV with the cowboy show, selling 20 Mule Team Borax. One glance and you knew you were looking at a giant, a colossus destined to bestride the world. I believe this was shortly after he made Bedtime for Bonzo, for such a man, triumphs are a commonplace.
…well, this right here, explains why you are “unaffected” by the decisions made by the Bush administration.
It is, quite simply, because you are unaffected, and you don’t care about those that are.
New Zealand were invited to become part of the Iraqi invasion force led by the United States, but after listening to Colin Powell’s presentation to the United Nations I am proud that my country did not sign on.
Since the United States have been in Iraq, the international community has pledged nearly 15 billion dollars toward reconstruction, the United States has pledged much more than that.
Yet, for all of that money, the power supply in Baghdad has gone from between 16 and 24 hours a day pre-war, to only 5 hours a day. Imagine trying to live in a city where you are only get five hours of electricity a day: you can’t keep your food in the freezer. You can’t watch TV. You can’t use air-conditioning.
Getting rid of the rubbish is an ordinary thing where we all live: imagine the plight of the rubbish collector in Iraq. Nearly 500 municipal workers have been killed in Iraq-most of them rubbish collectors. There were nearly 1200 garbage trucks pre-invasion: there are less than 400 now. Rubbish is literally piling up…
Or imagine being a doctor, or imagine trying to get medical care. 12 000 doctors have left Iraq since the invasion. Another 2000 have been murdered, and 250 kidnapped. And yet, according to US officials, things could be improved quite easily…
Close to 800 000 people are currently “internally displaced” (or in simpler words, forced to live somewhere other than there homes.) There are a further 1.8 million Iraqi refugees living out of Iraq (not all of these are the result of the invasion). Over 2 million “refugees”-that is half of New Zealand’s population, a truely staggering number.
You can’t walk down the street safely: let alone trust that you children get to school. Living in the right part of town is now a pre-requisite for staying alive. Five years ago President Bush got on TV denouncing Hussein because the citizens of Iraq couldn’t visit the Presidential Palaces, now the average Iraqi citizen cannot even get into the centre of town thanks to the mighty Green Zone: an area that has come to be known as a place for the Americans and the elite.
It is hard to even comprehend the life of the average citizen of Baghdad at the moment. Need petrol? Line up at the petrol station and wait for an hour. Don’t drive too slowly, because you will become a target for insurgents, but don’t drive too quickly because you may look suspicious and end up with some rounds in the engine block courtesy of the American road block around the corner.
But of course, this doesn’t affect you. I have no idea about the circumstances of you life right now, but you can count yourself lucky that you don’t live in Iraq, where in 2005 55% of all world wide terrorist attacks occured within its borders. This isn’t happening in your neighbourhood . Your missing it because you choose not to see it.
The people that are “annoyed” with you have less potable water than they did pre-invasion, have less power, have less religious freedom, have less right to move about their cities and have a much smaller chance of living to see tomorrow than you do. These “types” are suffering due to the decisions made by the Bush administration, and while you are perfectly content being “pretty cool in the scope of things” the lives of millions of Iraqi’s are unimportant to you because you simply choose to ignore it.
Congratulations on living in what you consider the “freest country in the world”. And congratulations on living somewhere where you don’t have to suffer the consequences of the Bush Administrations actions conducting The War Against Terror. Congratulations on not being able to understand the injustice in the cases of Jose Padilla, the Badr Brothers, David Hicks, Murat Kurnaz, Abassin Sayed, Khaled Masri, Abu Omar, Ruhal Ahmed, Shafiq Rasul, of Asif Iqbal. It must be nice to live in a world where if you choose simply to ignore a problem, it no longer exists.
(My previous arguements against the war on terror, with citations to support my position)
Your country was the third country to sign on to Afghanistan, and in the words of your Prime Minister, it was in “everyone’s interests” that Afghanistan had a “stable government”.
I fully agree with your Prime Minister and it is a great example of what I mean when I say that it is the specific people who are annoyed with the USA that matters. Your Prime Minister is a very smart and wise person. She is obviously not annoyed with us. I like when smart and wise people are not annoyed with us.
She sees that it is in everyone’s interests that Afghanistan has a stable government and although she doesn’t state it, I am sure likewise that she feels it is in everyone’s interest that Iraq also has a stable government, but I would guess she probably feels that combat in Afghanistan is enough to donate. I appreciate the effort.
Now, of course, most people reading this are going to complain that Iraq had a stable government until we toppled it… and to that I say meet me in the pit or possibly in another thread more suited to that argument. I am sure at has been done to death anyway.
Some attention has been paid to the theory that my inability to see the damage being claimed done by the administration of President GW Bush is simply a shortcoming on my end of not caring about those who are suffering damage. I now subscribe to that theory, but it is now even more of a mental burden to have to think that way about it because the cries of injustice and laments are now clearly involving those I do not care about. It is going to come to the point of where if I see someone with a sign saying “President GW Bush is enslaving the country!” I am going to feel the urge to tack on a Post-It note that says “Limited to the people that DevNull did not care about in the first place”.
Seriously, it turns out that all that was bugging me was that all those types of statements in the OP seemed to imply that my world and the people I care about were included. It turns out that it was not the case but rather that the statements were hyperbole and were not really meant to include my ilk. Thank you all again and case closed, unless someone else has more to add… other than chastising me for not caring about the specific people who feel that they are being enslaved, etc. Because I am telling you that you are wasting your breath. I admitted I do not care for those people in the first place. Rubbing my nose in it only makes it worse… if you can follow the logic.
And you have the Right to go right on believing that for yourself, provided your beliefs don’t cause undesired interference with anyone else’s natural rights.
Neat how that works, isn’t it?