Road Rage Incident - Did I do the right thing?

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:53:07 -0700, Mark Hickey wrote:

Preston Crawford wrote:

On 2005-03-17, Mark Hickey wrote:
Oh, by the way... did you catch the Senate vote on Social Security
today?

The language was that fixing our SS system is "a vital national
priority. And that action should be taken at the earliest
opportunity."

Passed by a slim majority. 100 to nobody, including of course a Mr.
Kerry and Ms. Clinton.

Still think there isn't anything wrong with the system? Maybe at
least now the two sides can (finally) start a dialog on the subject
instead of playing charades through the press (and politicizing an
issue that shouldn't be partisan to start with).

Yes. When politicians say something is true it always is.

"Read my lips, no new taxes."
"I'm not a crook."
"I didn't inhale."
"I didn't have sexual relations with that woman."

Come on. Politicians say and vote in a manner they feel is politically
necessary. Pointing to this as evidence is the height of idiocy. You
either don't know any better (in which case I feel bad for you) or you do
and you think we're all rubes. Come on!!

So... just to make sure I understand... 100 Senators, some rabidly
liberal, some just as rabidly conservative, voted unanimously that
something had to be done to save Social Security... just 'cuz they
like to lie???

Point out to me where Preston used the word "lie". I believe the phrase
he used was "politically necessary".

I think it's fair to say that the prez made enough noise about SS to make
it 'politically necessary' to be seen as taking some action on the subject.
That is a far cry from claiming that there's a 'crisis' requiring
completely restructuring a system that has been one of the federal
governments' most successful programs.

And, I might add, one that has been tweaked again and again in the past,
and will need to be tweaked in the future, nothing that requires tearing
down and rebuilding something that works.


That has GOT to be the weakest point ever attempted in a political
debate, Preston. Seriously.

Perhaps. But it strikes me that the way you misrepresented Preston's
point has a significant parallel with some of what I've heard from Fox,
Limbaugh, and the current administration.

Trying to intimate that I'm a numbskull because I happen to agree with
the 100 Senators is probably weaker now that I think about it.

You're not a numbskull because you agree with the text of that resolution,
you're a numbskull because you (apparently) can't read a post and respond
to the issues brought up in that post without warping them to something
you'd rather argue against.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

Thank you for helping me add another entry to my 'do not buy from' list.

Mark Mitchell

Tom Sherman wrote:
Bill Baka wrote:

More boring too. I hate English literature and my kid loves it. She
can now educate me on it, but still hasn't mastered advanced math,
chemistry, or physics. She doesn't really need to and she is looking
at about $40K to start teaching. Much better and more stable than IT
or electronics.


In the Midwest, civil engineers with BS degrees generally start out well
under $40K/year. Those with professional registration, an MS degree and
5-10 years of experience often are in the $45K/year range. And this is
for 45-50 hours per week, 50 hours per year, or a lot more than a
schoolteacher works.

Interesting.
The last time I worked in the Midwest was in Chicago in 1993 where I did
my usual electronics and got $58,000 plus good benefits. I routinely did
42 hour weeks albeit with the occasional overnighter at 28+ hours. That
was 12 years ago and I could probably go back and make $75K now unless
time and 9/11 have really ruined things worse than even my gloomy
observations.
??????
Bill Baka

Mark Mitchell wrote:
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:53:07 -0700, Mark Hickey wrote:

Preston Crawford wrote:

On 2005-03-17, Mark Hickey wrote:
Oh, by the way... did you catch the Senate vote on Social Security
today?

The language was that fixing our SS system is "a vital national
priority. And that action should be taken at the earliest
opportunity."

Passed by a slim majority. 100 to nobody, including of course a
Mr. Kerry and Ms. Clinton.

Still think there isn't anything wrong with the system? Maybe at
least now the two sides can (finally) start a dialog on the subject
instead of playing charades through the press (and politicizing an
issue that shouldn't be partisan to start with).

Yes. When politicians say something is true it always is.

"Read my lips, no new taxes."
"I'm not a crook."
"I didn't inhale."
"I didn't have sexual relations with that woman."

Come on. Politicians say and vote in a manner they feel is
politically necessary. Pointing to this as evidence is the height
of idiocy. You either don't know any better (in which case I feel
bad for you) or you do and you think we're all rubes. Come on!!

So... just to make sure I understand... 100 Senators, some rabidly
liberal, some just as rabidly conservative, voted unanimously that
something had to be done to save Social Security... just 'cuz they
like to lie???

Point out to me where Preston used the word "lie". I believe the
phrase he used was "politically necessary".

Look again. Just because he didn't use the WORD "lie", doesn't mean he
didn't say it. (Hint: it's ABOVE what you quoted.)

I think it's fair to say that the prez made enough noise about SS to
make it 'politically necessary' to be seen as taking some action on
the subject. That is a far cry from claiming that there's a 'crisis'
requiring completely restructuring a system that has been one of the
federal governments' most successful programs.

And, I might add, one that has been tweaked again and again in the
past, and will need to be tweaked in the future, nothing that
requires tearing down and rebuilding something that works.


That has GOT to be the weakest point ever attempted in a political
debate, Preston. Seriously.

Perhaps. But it strikes me that the way you misrepresented Preston's
point has a significant parallel with some of what I've heard from
Fox, Limbaugh, and the current administration.

Trying to intimate that I'm a numbskull because I happen to agree
with the 100 Senators is probably weaker now that I think about it.

You're not a numbskull because you agree with the text of that
resolution, you're a numbskull because you (apparently) can't read a
post and respond to the issues brought up in that post without
warping them to something you'd rather argue against.

Oh, fer gawd's sake. Here's what Preston wrote:

Yes. When politicians say something is true it always is.

"Read my lips, no new taxes."
"I'm not a crook."
"I didn't inhale."
"I didn't have sexual relations with that woman."

Mark didn't "misrepresent" it at all; he /countered/ it.

Black kettle much?

Mark Hickey wrote:
And $40K for a nine-month job would be the same earning rate as a
$53.3K/year 12 month job. Not really bad at all. FWIW, I have
tremendous respect for those who get into education because they want
our kids to get a better education. We've all seen that just a few
really dedicated teachers can make a HUGE difference in the outcome of
the educational process. And let's face it, there aren't many
"industries" where you have so much freedom in terms of where you can
go to earn a living (basically, anywhere with people).

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

Mark,
Teaching and medical may be the most well paying jobs in the future,
that much I do have to admit. Another upside is that it is much more
pleasant to be educating 'interested' kids, so I don't know how high
school will be. When I was a freshman in Illinois I attended Arlington
Heights high, which was somewhat of a snob school for the well off. It
had 3 levels of each class, standard, remedial, and advanced, and I made
it to advanced in all classes because I was interested in learning. I
also had many female study partners (one perk) and much more civilized
classmates than the standard classes. The remedials got all the punks
and the actual slow kids. Moving to California in 1963 was a culture
shock since all the classes were, too me, now remedial and I learned
that goofing off and cutting class was more the norm to be accepted. I
spent many days at Santa Cruz that should have been in class, so I
honestly can say that moving here impeded my educational opportunities.
Even if I had tried to be at the top, there was about a 2 year
differential in the level of classes being taught.

On biking, 1963-1964 had a lot of snow on Mount Hamilton and Saratoga
summit so I had motivation for some very long rides just to get into an
old fashioned snowball fight in California. From my house to the
observatory over Mount Day and back was roughly a Century with a lot of
climbing. Those were good days.
Bill Baka

Tom Sherman wrote:
Mark Hickey wrote:

The job situation for engineers has been changing for a long time, for
a lot of reasons (I don't see 9/11 as a particular turning point, that
is). There are simply too many of 'em - partially because many were
drawn to the field by the big bucks they were getting due to the
shortage of engineers a couple decades ago - and partially because
countries like India and China are turning out a lot of really good
engineers....


The real reason civil engineers' pay is so low is that their primary
responsibility is to protect the safety of the public. To make real
money, you have to help the very rich get even richer, e.g. corporate
lawyer.

I lived well on $75K but felt a bit guilty working on stuff for the DOD,
and I don't think I could live with myself being a lawyer, especially
the corporate crud, no matter what the paycheck.
Bill Baka

Preston Crawford wrote:


Preston, you're really bumming me out. When the liberals make more
sense than my fellow republicans... it is time for me to start
drinking
again.

It's okay. Maybe you're a closet liberal and don't realize it. :-)

Or maybe it's just the contrast between my logic and facts and Mark's

dogma.

Yes, and perhaps it is a sign that good people can disagree on how to
arrive at a common goal. Now if only your side could dispose of
Hillary Clinton, and if the republican side could have every neo-con
stabbed in the back of the neck with an ice-pick (fitting death for
traitors, I think), we could go forward to making our country both
strong and an inspiration for all other countries.

MJR wrote:
Preston Crawford wrote:


Preston, you're really bumming me out. When the liberals make more
sense than my fellow republicans... it is time for me to start

drinking

again.

It's okay. Maybe you're a closet liberal and don't realize it. :-)

Or maybe it's just the contrast between my logic and facts and Mark's


dogma.


Yes, and perhaps it is a sign that good people can disagree on how to
arrive at a common goal. Now if only your side could dispose of
Hillary Clinton, and if the republican side could have every neo-con
stabbed in the back of the neck with an ice-pick (fitting death for
traitors, I think), we could go forward to making our country both
strong and an inspiration for all other countries.

The Republicans would have to stab themselves then since they are the
real 'neo-cons', but I guess you can't see that.
Bill Baka

bbaka wrote:
MJR wrote:
Preston Crawford wrote:


Preston, you're really bumming me out. When the liberals make
more
sense than my fellow republicans... it is time for me to start

drinking

again.

It's okay. Maybe you're a closet liberal and don't realize it. :-)

Or maybe it's just the contrast between my logic and facts and
Mark's


dogma.


Yes, and perhaps it is a sign that good people can disagree on how
to
arrive at a common goal. Now if only your side could dispose of
Hillary Clinton, and if the republican side could have every
neo-con
stabbed in the back of the neck with an ice-pick (fitting death for
traitors, I think), we could go forward to making our country both
strong and an inspiration for all other countries.

The Republicans would have to stab themselves then since they are the

real 'neo-cons', but I guess you can't see that.
Bill Baka


Bill, I'm not sure that I would lump Olympia Snowe, Bill Weld, or John
McCain in with Tom DeLay, Sam Brownback, or John Kyl.

bbaka wrote:

Mark,
Teaching and medical may be the most well paying jobs in the future,
that much I do have to admit. Another upside is that it is much more
pleasant to be educating 'interested' kids, so I don't know how high
school will be. When I was a freshman in Illinois I attended Arlington
Heights high, which was somewhat of a snob school for the well off. It
had 3 levels of each class, standard, remedial, and advanced, and I made
it to advanced in all classes because I was interested in learning. I
also had many female study partners (one perk) and much more civilized
classmates than the standard classes. The remedials got all the punks
and the actual slow kids.

I too am a product of the Illinois school system, from a rural area in
southern Illinois (about 50 miles east of St. Louis). Back then
(ending in the late 60's / early 70's) the schools in my area were
rated very high on the national scale, though I'm sure we weren't
positively awash in money to make it so. It all came down to teachers
who were interested in teaching, and (for the most part) kids who were
interested in learning. I finished out HS in that system, but did
find most of the college-level stuff laughably easy when I went
elsewhere (schools in KY, FL and AZ). I feel very lucky to have grown
up there (and also, to have moved away). ;-)

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame

Mark Mitchell wrote:

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:53:07 -0700, Mark Hickey wrote:
Preston Crawford wrote:
On 2005-03-17, Mark Hickey wrote:

Yes. When politicians say something is true it always is.

"Read my lips, no new taxes."
"I'm not a crook."
"I didn't inhale."
"I didn't have sexual relations with that woman."

Come on. Politicians say and vote in a manner they feel is politically
necessary. Pointing to this as evidence is the height of idiocy. You
either don't know any better (in which case I feel bad for you) or you do
and you think we're all rubes. Come on!!

So... just to make sure I understand... 100 Senators, some rabidly
liberal, some just as rabidly conservative, voted unanimously that
something had to be done to save Social Security... just 'cuz they
like to lie???

Point out to me where Preston used the word "lie". I believe the phrase
he used was "politically necessary".

He didn't use the word "lie" - but he couldn't have possibly intimated
that any stronger than he did (look at the examples he used).

I think it's fair to say that the prez made enough noise about SS to make
it 'politically necessary' to be seen as taking some action on the subject.
That is a far cry from claiming that there's a 'crisis' requiring
completely restructuring a system that has been one of the federal
governments' most successful programs.

Fortunately enough for us all, no one has proposed "completely
restructuring" the system. Privatization of a small portion of the
participant's money, and tweaking some of the formulas doesn't qualify
as "completely restructuring" by a long, long shot in my view.

And, I might add, one that has been tweaked again and again in the past,
and will need to be tweaked in the future, nothing that requires tearing
down and rebuilding something that works.

Could we possibly be in any more violent agreement? ;-)

That has GOT to be the weakest point ever attempted in a political
debate, Preston. Seriously.

Perhaps. But it strikes me that the way you misrepresented Preston's
point has a significant parallel with some of what I've heard from Fox,
Limbaugh, and the current administration.

Oh, c'mon... he says (with obvious sarcasm) "when polititians say
something is true it always is...", then gives four obvious examples
of polititians lying (or at least saying something that later turned
out NOT to be true). You might consider than "misrepresenting"
Preston's point - but only if you think he was actually trying to make
the point that polititians DO always tell the truth, and truly
believes that Bill didn't inhale or have sexual relations with Monica,
GHWB didn't raise taxes, and Nixon didn't have anything to do with
Watergate. Let's just say "I'm betting he didn't mean it that way"...
;-)

Trying to intimate that I'm a numbskull because I happen to agree with
the 100 Senators is probably weaker now that I think about it.

You're not a numbskull because you agree with the text of that resolution,
you're a numbskull because you (apparently) can't read a post and respond
to the issues brought up in that post without warping them to something
you'd rather argue against.

So you REALLY think he thought those were four noteworthy instances of
truthfulness???

Thank you for helping me add another entry to my 'do not buy from' list.

Your loss.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $695 ti frame