Where the Gun Issue is Going

[Snow Bird]

I still say run for office.

 

[oldefoxx]

For those who don't like seeing each other's posts... there is an ignore function that I think we would all benefit from greatly.

I would think so. Yes, I fully agree. Difference is, that in real life, if someone gets in your face, you can always walk away, unless that is exactly what they are trying to make you do. I have a right here as much as anybody else, and my point of view is driven by years of experience and exposure to a lot. So I am just trying to make good on that.

I've a brother-in-law that passed away recently. Could never talk to him because he would come out of a coffee shop or Whataburger full of new ideas from the people he sat and talked with. He always took what they said as gospel, and never doubted that he was hearing from people who were really in the know. If they were hanging around like that, and feeding gunk to each other, how much could any of them really know? From what he always had to say, very little.

 

[ben_p]

I think oldefoxx should be given his own section!

 

[oldefoxx]

I still say run for office.

.

You can't change anything by running for office. To win, you have to compromise in order to get backing and support. You have to tell people what they want to hear, not what they need to know. And the one that wins is the one that is least tarred and scarred from a long and bitter campaign. How productive is that? Wasn't there an old movie about the Candidate in which the candidate got so involved in the process, that afterwards he was at a loss as to what to do next? Robert Redford played the starring role.

Our manner of government is seriously flawed, and it really shows in Washington right now. The Constitution did not go far enough, but they tried when they allowed for Amendments to be added. There are just 27 Amendments to the Constitution, and ten of those were added before it was even approved. Two cover Prohibition, one covers Income Tax, and you can check out the rest for yourself online. Now we are struggling to keep what rights we have because we have let a bunch of people that do not want us to keep what we have just come in and take over. It took them a few decades to do it, but each time they reach a majority status, they take away more. You don't fight that with guns, you fight that with votes and getting orgainized so that the truth has a chance of coming out.

And you don't fight it by saying that everybody knows it already and let's just move on to something else.

 

[ilintner]

I would think so. Yes, I fully agree. Difference is, that in real life, if someone gets in your face, you can always walk away, unless that is exactly what they are trying to make you do. I have a right here as much as anybody else, and my point of view is driven by years of experience and exposure to a lot. So I am just trying to make good on that.

I've a brother-in-law that passed away recently. Could never talk to him because he would come out of a coffee shop or Whataburger full of new ideas from the people he sat and talked with. He always took what they said as gospel, and never doubted that he was hearing from people who were really in the know. If they were hanging around like that, and feeding gunk to each other, how much could any of them really know? From what he always had to say, very little.

You Sir are correct, you do have a right to be a member of the community as much as anyone else who posts within the rules.

I made my suggestion in the hopes that You and Frank would both utilize the ignore button rather than bicker. Not placing fault, some people just don't like what other's say...

I bet that you and Fiftycal could have yourselves quite a conversation though, you are both pretty verbose .

 

[oldefoxx]

You Sir are correct, you do have a right to be a member of the community as much as anyone else who posts within the rules.

I made my suggestion in the hopes that You and Frank would both utilize the ignore button rather than bicker. Not placing fault, some people just don't like what other's say...

I bet that you and Fiftycal could have yourselves quite a conversation though, you are both pretty verbose .

As to being verbose, I concede the point. Not everybody thinks in a way where they start on some premise and immediately jump to some conclusion. My job as I see it is to see how the facts fit together, and to pull in more facts as needed until the conclusion is obvious. I think as I write, not write what i think. I won't start a topic unless I have some idea of where it is going, but then I lay out the facts as best I can as I go along so that others can follow my line of reasoning. It's like the difference in reading the novel Moby Dick or just going through a comic book on the same theme. People that just jump to conclusions may or may not be in the right, which makes it a dangerous move if you turn out to be wrong.

Here is an example: The CEO of Sprint became that when his boss died. For years he was inspired by his old boss's vision and sense of direction. But he broke ranks at several places that practically ruined the company. One was when he decided to do something to help the workers with their stock options when the company slipped, and did not take the other stockholders into consideration. Another was when he agreed to a vast merger that would put him in charge of a new telecommunications company named WorldCom. That didn't fly, but it came close, and we suffered another big drop afterwards. A third is when he decided to push a pioneering technology that he and others came up with that they called ION, only to find out that it would not work with existing PBX systems that companies already had installed. He tried to get the FCC to agree that everybody had to have a new PBX system that ION would work with, and that fell flat. If they did not want it or need it, then why force them to support it?

This is a man that people liked and respected, but he was dabbling in areas that went beyond his expertise, and was not getting all the facts as he went. I was not expert in these areas myself, but even I could see some real tanglements with each one. For one thing, WordCom would have been a mix of MCI and Sprint together, and from Sprint's viewpoint, that was no advantage, but something that would pull our culture and worker's rights down. He was obviously doing it only for his own personal benefit, of heading up a super coalition.

Sprint is still in business and sometimes merging, which is what any company in the telecommunications industry does to survive. I'm not knocking it. In fact I am proud I worked for it.
Ended up in the best job doing the most productive work in my long career there, and would have stayed longer if I could have.

 

[ilintner]

As to being verbose, I concede the point. Not everybody thinks in a way where they start on some premise and immediately jump to some conclusion. My job as I see it is to see how the facts fit together, and to pull in more facts as needed until the conclusion is obvious. I think as I write, not write what i think. I won't start a topic unless I have some idea of where it is going, but then I lay out the facts as best I can as I go along so that others can follow my line of reasoning. It's like the difference in reading the novel Moby Dick or just going through a comic book on the same theme. People that just jump to conclusions may or may not be in the right, which makes it a dangerous move if you turn out to be wrong.

Here is an example: The CEO of Sprint became that when his boss died. For years he was inspired by his old boss's vision and sense of direction. But he broke ranks at several places that practically ruined the company. One was when he decided to do something to help the workers with their stock options when the company slipped, and did not take the other stockholders into consideration. Another was when he agreed to a vast merger that would put him in charge of a new telecommunications company named WorldCom. That didn't fly, but it came close, and we suffered another big drop afterwards. A third is when he decided to push a pioneering technology that he and others came up with that they called ION, only to find out that it would not work with existing PBX systems that companies already had installed. He tried to get the FCC to agree that everybody had to have a new PBX system that ION would work with, and that fell flat. If they did not want it or need it, then why force them to support it?

This is a man that people liked and respected, but he was dabbling in areas that went beyond his expertise, and was not getting all the facts as he went. I was not expert in these areas myself, but even I could see some real tanglements with each one. For one thing, WordCom would have been a mix of MCI and Sprint together, and from Sprint's viewpoint, that was no advantage, but something that would pull our culture and worker's rights down. He was obviously doing it only for his own personal benefit, of heading up a super coalition.

Sprint is still in business and sometimes merging, which is what any company in the telecommunications industry does to survive. I'm not knocking it. In fact I am proud I worked for it.
Ended up in the best job doing the most productive work in my long career there, and would have stayed longer if I could have.

Not TOO verbose, simply verbose... I wasn't picking at you, just observing.

 

[Snow Bird]

Thanks Ian. Had to look verbose up. Now I learned something..... Never to old to learn