CSM: Watch where you point that camera

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Mxsmanic, May 23, 2005.

  1. Mxsmanic

    Lisa Horton Guest

    Gee, I didn't know that liberal was spelled republican :)

    Lisa Horton, May 26, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. If liberal means forcing people to live one way and raising costs then
    the correct spelling is C-A-N-O-N. :)
    George Preddy, May 26, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Matt Silberstein wrote in part:

    This sounds like something that your basic neo-orthodox
    anti-patrio-psychotic-anarcho-materialist might say. Typical.
    Unclaimed Mysteries, May 26, 2005
  4. Mxsmanic

    DaveW Guest

    Not to defend smoking, but, there have been studies that concluded that
    smokers save the taxpayer money on average. First of all, they tend not
    to collect as much Social Security and other benefits because they die

    Second, most people, smokers or not, consume something like 50% of their
    entire lifetime healthcare in the final year of their life, regardless
    of what age they reach. Everyone dies of something, and most of the
    causes involve a great deal of medical care.

    Third, smokers pay a goodly amount of tobacco taxes over the course of a
    lifetime. Same goes for dealing with the dead. If the deceased is
    indigent, it really doesn't matter how they die, the body needs to be
    disposed of somehow. Funny thing, today is the one year anniversary of
    my grandmother's death. She was 94, and had quit smoking before I was
    born when cigarettes went up to 17 cents a pack. But having just been to
    the cemetary, I wonder where DO they put unclaimed bodies?

    As a reformed smoker (quit 2 years ago) I can tell you that they buy
    more detergent, clothes, vacuum cleaner bags and glass cleaner too.

    As for blowing smoke in someone's way, that's just rude.

    Now, as for drinking, well that is a bit different, I'd say. There is
    real potential to harm others by acting under the influence of drink.
    But if they don't kill anyone and die at 60 instead of 90, they have
    saved the taxpayer a bundle.


    OM2 loaded with perhaps my last roll of Kodachrome
    DaveW, May 26, 2005
  5. Mxsmanic

    Jer Guest

    I've heard similar comments before, and I've just figured it's a typical
    kneejerk reaction from being screwed over by a hijacked airliner.
    What's good for the goose...
    Jer, May 26, 2005
  6. I doubt if there is such a thing as a "classic liberal". Liberalism didn't
    become the PITA it is today until the 70's. It used to be a philosophy to be
    proud of. Now, it is just another name for socialism, or, "Lets steal Bill
    Graham's money away from him and give it to the poor, because he must have
    gotten it by stealing it from them to begin with."
    William Graham, May 26, 2005
  7. Yes....Everyone dies of something, and I think we should all be allowed to
    choose our own poison. the 60,000 people who die of second-hand smoke every
    year is a big lie, pushed by the ACS.
    My mother smoked for 75 years. (15 to 90). She quit smoking at 90 because
    they were, "Too expensive." She went on to live another 6 years. I don't
    feel near so lucky....I quit in 1983 after smoking for 29 years......
    William Graham, May 26, 2005
  8. But this is exactly what they (the liberals) did in Palo Alto,
    California, and is just another of the skillion reasons why I don't live
    there anymore.....
    William Graham, May 26, 2005
  9. I don't understand your meaning in your last sentence. Rather than my
    speculating, would you please elaborate.

    Matt Silberstein

    All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
    a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
    there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
    end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
    or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.
    Matt Silberstein, May 26, 2005
  10. Mxsmanic

    Jer Guest

    The New York skyline got screwed over by an airliner, so all the
    anti-photo scramming by New York authorities seems like a knee-jerk
    reaction from them to everyone else. They've become hypersensitive to
    their own security for no effective reason. I require a law to be
    measurably effective as a condition of it's validity.
    Jer, May 27, 2005
  11. Ok, but I still don't understand the applicability of the geese

    Matt Silberstein

    All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
    a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
    there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
    end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
    or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.
    Matt Silberstein, May 27, 2005
  12. Mxsmanic

    Jer Guest

    "What's good for the goose is good for the gander." This is your basic
    foundation of a zero tolerance policy. Boil everybody down to the same
    lowest common denominator. Suspect everyone with a camera, ergo, ban
    all cameras. When cameras are outlawed, only outlaws will have cameras.
    I could prolly come up with more brilliantly stupid shit, but I'm glad
    someone with the NYTA finally woke up and smelled their opinion.
    Jer, May 27, 2005
  13. Mxsmanic

    Bandicoot Guest

    ones that raise taxes are laws that force everyone to
    No, that's not being a true liberal. That's just trying to change the
    meaning of a word in order to use it as a brush to tar everyone you disagree

    Bandicoot, May 28, 2005
  14. Mxsmanic

    Bandicoot Guest

    Originally "What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander."

    Bandicoot, May 28, 2005
  15. Yes. Well, I calls 'em like I see 'em.........
    William Graham, May 28, 2005
  16. Mxsmanic

    Bandicoot Guest

    Not really - what you're doing is taking a trait you don't like and saying
    "that's what it is to be a liberal" - which it is not. Liberal thinking is
    much broader and does not centre on the characteristics you identify - even
    though that is a current thread in some parts of US political thought.

    You would object f I said that what it means to be a libertarian is whatever
    I choose it to mean, because I'm not one so I can call then all whatever I
    like, rather than saying I know what it means, and I disagree with some
    parts of it; and some libertarians, but not all, have other views too that I
    may or may not agree with. It's a simple matter of making the language mean
    something, instead of changing meaning whenever you feel like it.

    Bandicoot, May 29, 2005
  17. Yes, but I would not object if you used the word, "libertarian" to mean what
    you came to believe it meant from your own personal experience. To describe
    the people whom you came to believe were libertarians by their own

    This is what I have come to believe are liberals. A group of people that
    think and talk in a manner that I have come to know through my own
    experience. They are all around me. My own sister is one of them. They are
    my neighbors and friends. And they all have some common characteristics and
    thought processes that I have come to know as liberal characteristics. these
    people are admitted liberals. they call themselves liberals. - I did not
    define them as such.....they have defined themselves as such to me.

    I am currently creating a ledger of these characteristics. Perhaps
    someday I will turn it into a book. It is a study of the liberal mind. Sort
    of a psychoanalysis of the liberal thought process. A, "study of illogic" as
    it were. I find it very interesting, in the same way that I find
    anthropological studies of other cultures interesting. Only this study is
    more interesting, because these people come from the same background that I
    come from. They went to the same schools, and had the same instructors that
    I had. I can not blame their lifestyles and thought processes on a
    particular environment or environmental pressure, which is what
    anthropologists frequently blame other culture's differences on. But there
    has to be some difference. I may never know exactly what it is, but I find
    it extremely interesting to look for it. It has become a hobby almost as
    interesting as my music. I spend as much time thinking about it as I do
    arranging or practicing.....
    Part of the study consists in bugging liberals, so they respond
    defensively, or at least attempt to justify their beliefs. "Argue" with me,
    if you will. This is frequently the only way I can carry out my
    investigation. I hate it when I make them too angry, and they reduce the
    discussion to name calling....That is not my intention. My real intention is
    to elicit a logical response....To find out exactly why they believe as they
    do. To get at the, "root" of their belief about any particular thing.
    Sometimes, I find that their belief is more logical than my own, and they
    actually convince me that I am wrong about some particular thing. But this
    is perfectly normal. No one can study anything without learning
    something.....After all, that's what life is all about, isn't it?
    But you are wrong when you say that I simply call everything that I
    disagree with a liberal characteristic. I have already identified a number
    of definite ideas as liberal ideas, and I can trace a number of things back
    to their liberal origins, or principles. I am building up a list of these
    principles, together with the logical process that translates these basic
    principles into decisions that result in the ballot box decisions that I
    have come to expect the liberals to make. I could give you several examples,
    but this is becoming too long already.
    William Graham, May 29, 2005
  18. William Graham wrote in part:

    Some libertarians are trying to reclaim the word by referring to
    themselves as "classical liberals." One is free to waste one's time
    telling them they are wasting their time trying to do that.

    Once I know the context I have no problem with that term.

    My issue with cap-L Libertarians is that too many of them believe the
    World begins and ends with Atlas Shrugged. This is quite fine and dandy
    to postulate at the local MENSA club meeting at Shoney's, but quite
    impossible to even visualize in the real world. You just can't reboot
    reality to implement your plans.
    Unclaimed Mysteries, May 30, 2005
  19. "Unclaimed Mysteries"
    Some of the principals voiced by Ms. Rand are very useful and valid, and
    completely wasted on Liberals. One that comes to mind is the usefulness of
    translating everything, (including human life) into dollars. There is simply
    no other way to do it, as has been proven time and again in tort cases
    throughout the world. But the liberals still throw up their hands in horror
    at the very suggestion that a life can be evaluated in terms of money. The
    idea that a shortage of money can cause loss of life, (or a smaller life
    expectancy) through poor food, water, or health care don't make no never
    mind to them.......
    William Graham, May 30, 2005
  20. On Sun, 29 May 2005 13:36:59 -0700, in rec.photo.digital , "William
    Graham" <> in <>

    So what happens when a self-professed liberal disagrees with your
    characterization of liberals? Do you use that to re-enforce your view
    or do you question it?

    Matt Silberstein

    All in all, if I could be any animal, I would want to be
    a duck or a goose. They can fly, walk, and swim. Plus,
    there there is a certain satisfaction knowing that at the
    end of your life you will taste good with an orange sauce
    or, in the case of a goose, a chestnut stuffing.
    Matt Silberstein, May 31, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.