Made in China, (Buyer Beware)

[Crippled Caddis]

gf wrote:

<It would be nice to get people to boycott. Problem is if they won't boycott the price of gas for even one day there is no chance of getting them to boycott unsafe food, meds and other products.

Yup----therein lies the problem. If they're too apathetic to inform themselves and VOTE intelligently how're you gonna get 'em to take such concerted effort as a boycott. That's why I painted such a gloomy picture about the future of our nation-----only massive, unreasoning anger will produce concerted effort and that way lies bloodshed. CC

[brownieman]

gf wrote:

<It would be nice to get people to boycott. Problem is if they won't boycott the price of gas for even one day there is no chance of getting them to boycott unsafe food, meds and other products.

Yup----therein lies the problem. If they're too apathetic to inform themselves and VOTE intelligently how're you gonna get 'em to take such concerted effort as a boycott. That's why I painted such a gloomy picture about the future of our nation-----only massive, unreasoning anger will produce concerted effort and that way lies bloodshed. CC

Once again with a non forked tongue the voice of reason speaketh the truth!

VOTING...imo voting intelligently would be a good thing, no doubt...just seems it would be nice to have intelligence to cast our ballots for...guess I'll keep on castin for fish, sad...but one is much more enjoyable than the other, lol

[fishinwrench]

Yup----therein lies the problem. If they're too apathetic to inform themselves and VOTE intelligently

With all due respect: How can ANYONE "vote intelligently", when all you have, to base your decision on....or to "inform yourself with" as you say...is what you hear, or percieve through the media. Or our personal impressions based on our own self-proclaimed "supurb judge of character"?

The cards are never on the table....so any "intellegent vote" is simply a crapshoot...at best. A candidate may be completely honest in their intentions....but once in office they probably LEARN A FEW THINGS, that change their stratagy, and their direction in a big way. They get enlightened, so to speak. At least that is the way I see it.

Besides, what confirms the accuracy of a vote count in any election anyway, a government agency ? PFFFFT !

How do we know that the whole voting process isn't simply a staged nationwide crock of bull ? Like everything else.

[Crippled Caddis]

fishingwrench wrote:

<With all due respect: How can ANYONE "vote intelligently", when all you have, to base your decision on....or to "inform yourself with" as you say...is what you hear, or percieve through the media. Or our personal impressions based on our own self-proclaimed "supurb judge of character"?>

Sorry---I was implying that the USE of intelligence is required to become informed. That certainly does not infer dependence on media for that belies the exercise of intelligent research. The ability to 'judge character' from historical evidence IS one of the marks of intelligence.

<The cards are never on the table....so any "intellegent vote" is simply a crapshoot...at best. A candidate may be completely honest in their intentions....but once in office they probably LEARN A FEW THINGS, that change their stratagy, and their direction in a big way. They get enlightened, so to speak. At least that is the way I see it.>

I understand your cynicism well. It is based on historical evidence---the only benchmark worthy of intelligence. And exercising the option to 'throw the Bastard out' at the ballot box is exactly what I advocate.

<Besides, what confirms the accuracy of a vote count in any election anyway, a government agency ? PFFFFT !

How do we know that the whole voting process isn't simply a staged nationwide crock of bull ? Like everything else.>

I share your cynicism in spades. CC

[drew03cmc]

Wow. I cannot even comment based on these last few posts! Amen.

[fishinwrench]

I understand your cynicism well. It is based on historical evidence---the only benchmark worthy of intelligence. And exercising the option to 'throw the Bastard out' at the ballot box is exactly what I advocate.

But, to "throw a Basturd out",simply allows another Basturd in. Only the name and face changes.

[Crippled Caddis]

<But, to "throw a Basturd out",simply allows another Basturd in. Only the name and face changes.>

Please read post # 44 above for the reasoning.

[fishinwrench]

<But, to "throw a Basturd out",simply allows another Basturd in. Only the name and face changes.>

Please read post # 44 above for the reasoning.

Thanks, my apologys for jumping lazily into mid-conversation..

I guess we do share what could be defined as cynicism....but I prefer to think I am actually in touch with reality. To call these mindsets "cynical views", implys that they are not actually correct, and real....And I very much believe that they are.

[Crippled Caddis]

Websters New World Dictionary

cynical-Denying the sincerity of peoples motives and actions.

Er----well yes, that describes my attitude towards politicians and government quite well in fact. ,o)

[fishinwrench]

I know, but to say someone is a "cynical person" isn't commonly regarded as a term of endearment (not that I take offense to being called cynical, at all).

But in order of terms, it rates right up there with.. Curmudgeon, and horses-butt, among most of society. LMAO

That's all I meant.

See how politically correct I am trying to be......WTF? somebody slap me.