07 August 2009

change?

[click image]
\\\\\ 8/07/2009 12:06:00 AM \\\\\ ,

12 comments:

  1. Off the Grid8/7/09, 10:40 AM

    Break a leg.

    ReplyDelete
  2. wimpy8/7/09, 11:08 AM

    Sam! Hi.

    I don't know what he's doing promising the industry anything. Unless I'm delusional healthcare reform is something that has to be enacted by Congress, and presidential assurances can only extend to his veto of whatever they put in front of him. First he's the one going to present the bill, then, no, it's up to Congress to work it out, now, no, they have to take the heat, but he gets to call the shots.

    Lobbyists should be limited to only speaking their minds, or their clients' minds, with no money, gifts, campaign donations, junkets or pre-written bill language about it. AND IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO GET THAT OUT OF ANY OF THEM.

    Outright impossible.

    So, more like I want to break their legs.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Off the Grid8/7/09, 11:31 AM

    All I see is a dog and pony show 'til the real carnage starts with the economy, infrastructure, and global warming. i.e. put the rock star up front, blah blah blah...he's only got to make it to 2012 then we'll have enough carnage for one world goverment. Those fuckers can't even get car financing right and I'm supposed to believe they have a solution for health care. Fuck.

    ReplyDelete
  4. wimpy8/7/09, 11:47 AM

    Right you are.

    The thing that is the worst about this is that almost everyone under 40 is completely clueless and will take it in stride, while the rest of us stroke out from apoplexy.

    In a very twisted way, the wingnuts are right about this stuff. They DO want to kill off the old people. The only real question left is if they will just let us die out relatively peacefully or actively disappear us or affirmatively drive us to heart failure and not revive us.....

    ReplyDelete
  5. Off the Grid8/7/09, 11:50 AM

    Have you looked at the USDX lately? 200 day moving average resumes pre-election downturn, dollar @ Oct 2007 level. The recession is over, says the lawyer.

    ReplyDelete
  6. wimpy8/7/09, 11:51 AM

    Population reduction really IS a great way to solve the carbon emissions problem. My only gripe with that approach is the cruelty with which they will accomplish it. Instead of humanely going about a rapid population reduction, it costs less and makes more profit to do it through wars and disease than to simply cap the number of babies and let the excess just check out naturally.

    ReplyDelete
  7. wimpy8/7/09, 11:54 AM

    Yes. We seem to be getting that "jobless recovery" they had planned. Ain't it grand?

    The revolution not only will not be televised: It will not happen.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Off the Grid8/7/09, 11:58 AM

    I think we aught to get rid of religion...think of the population reduction in Utah alone. Treat pregnancy like we treat marijuana use... Accident-->pregnancy test-->fired with no insurance.

    ReplyDelete
  9. wimpy8/7/09, 12:09 PM

    Heh, the population would plummet for sure then! :-P

    But, actually, it's the global population that is the worst problem. We have, I think, a less than zero population growth here already... which may have changed since last I looked.

    Everybody screams about China's inhumanity with the one child rule, but that is infinitely more compassionate than our remedies for it, and it would work rapidly enough if we would simply raise the standard of living for the huddled masses so that ONE kid could live a normal life and sterilizing the parent wouldn't doom them to childlessness.

    We would then have bigger emissions reductions than anything we even hope for now and faster.

    You might argue that capitalism is even more responsible for the awful straits of billions of people, but I'd say over-population and capitalism are on a par in the root causes of all our troubles department. It just drives me wild that EVEN something as intelligent and relatively doable as enforcing a one child rule globally is seen as evil when blowing crowds to bits, wholesale slaughter, and brute indifference to lethal poverty seem to most as just the way things go.

    Fuck.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Off the Grid8/7/09, 12:30 PM

    Entitlement to children comes from the same place as entitlement to extiction.

    ReplyDelete
  11. wimpy8/7/09, 12:45 PM

    We've seen it over and over again in the animal kingdom, where a species that fails to regulate its reproduction to match the food supply, or other things necessary for survival, that it does not just kill off some of the population, but ALL of it. What in the world would make us think that was any different for us? Lab food? It's idiotic.

    It's greed-induced blindness... which would not change with a drastic population reduction, but would forestall the cataclysmic its effects.

    ReplyDelete
  12. wimpy8/7/09, 12:46 PM

    ... its cataclysmic effects.... Yeesh.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)