Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 10 to 18 of 24

Thread: Treasonous Berkley city council.

  1. #10

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Quote Originally Posted by matclone View Post
    No. It's pretty clear you're ready to swallow anything presented in right wing media like freerepublic "as is". Treasonous, my ass. What bilge. I like how it it you advocated punishing the citizens of Berkeley (meaning, inevitably children) by withholding federal funds for the council's temerity in taking a politically unpopular choice. I guess their pain would make you feel better. As for what the Council might be thinking, that's wholly irrelevant in your right-wing world. You cannot, I repeat, cannot, articulate, much less acknowledge, Berkeley's point of view. In your world, they are simply reprehensible people that deserve punishment. No, they are not even people. They are just whackos and they are your enemy.
    Clone, let's make sure that we understand exactly what is going on before we start slinging such hate as "punishing the citizens of Berkeley." We both know that Ugly doesn't advocate punishing the citizens of Berkeley -- he advocates withholding federal funds from the City of Berkeley's government. Be sure to make that distinction.

    That government, which is part of the United States, has rejected the peacable (not war or occupation) presence of an arm of the US government. If it rejects that arm of the government, it rejects the rest of the system -- funding included.

    But, make sure that you understand that the GOVERNMENT of Berkeley is the source of the action that could "punish" its own citizens. Ugly and I advocate incentives (withholding of funding) for the government in Berkeley. If the citizens get "punished," it is only because their local government didn't act in their best interests.

    The local government in Berkeley is doing more to punish the citizens of Berkeley than Ugly is advocating or the federal government is doing.

  2. #11

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Quote Originally Posted by matclone View Post
    Btw, Willie Brown was on Charlie Rose last night. Remember my claim that some people would not vote for Obama because he is black that so upset you? Well, Brown acknowledged my point of view last night (he also said some people would vote for Obama because he was black). Brown (former mayor of San Francisco and speaker of the house in Calif) also said, if he had run for election in Texas or North Carolina he would not have been elected. Rose: "because of your color?". Brown: "yes". Brown is black.
    BTW, Willie Brown is as extreme left and hung up on the race card as they come. He concentrates more on race than he does on facts. I wouldn't be too pleased that he backed up any of my positions. That would just discredit me.

    But, how does he know if he would havebeen elected or not anyway? Isn't that why we have actual elections -- to see who would have actually been elected?

  3. #12
    NCAA Champ ccbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Minnesota, USA
    Posts
    1,144

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    I like the idea of the USA having some kind of mandated national service for a 2 to 3 year period.

    That service would include choosing from groups like the Peace Corps, the AmeriCorps, the military, etc. I would also like to see partial or full tuition forgiveness for nurses and doctors who agree to serve/practice in inner cities or rural areas where there are a shortage of health care professionals.

  4. #13
    National Finalist
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    832

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    skipster,
    You nailed it. It wouldn't be the gov harming the kids, it would be the city leaders by their inappropiate actions. Actually, the gov with holding funds could be viewed as helping the kids by ensuring this activity by put to an end and structure rather than chaos be instated. (their actions are chaos because they violate law for no justified reason).

  5. #14
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,934

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Clone I can tell you the position of the Berkley city council. They have said they view the Marine recruiters as unwanted, unwelcome, invaders and want them out. That is what they think.

  6. #15
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,934

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Clone I like how you attack my source but provide no source to refute mine. I did hear today that in light of the city losing federal and state aid the council has modified its verbage but not its attitude towards the marines.

  7. #16
    Super Moderator UGLY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Littleton, CO
    Posts
    4,934

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Quote Originally Posted by _SL_ View Post
    Alright Ugly. I would not identify too closely with them, but I can at least see where they are coming from. Recruiters can be very good at their jobs. When I was 17 they gave me a very good pitch (i really wanted the $ for college). I am very grateful that I have people to support me financially and who were able to talk me out of it. Not everybody has that, and while I think they Berkeley is being short-sighted and foolish I wouldn't question the intelligence of other people by association. There are very intelligent people who are extreme (on both sides).

    I also would never wish a state of emergency on anyone, which would certainly hurt people not even involved, and I doubt many people would change their minds.
    I would ask you one question. Do you think Military recruiters do more harm to young college student by recruiting them or do you think credit card companies do more harm to young college students by recruiting them?

    I was in the military and would recommend the military to almost anyone who is not sure of what they want or those who don't want to go to college. The military offers great job training and is a good career if you choose to go that route. I will also say that we have an all volunteer military and its not as if recruiters are forcing people to join. They have a job to do and it is a very important job. Without recruiters I believe are military forces would dwindle.

  8. #17

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    I would ask you one question. Do you think Military recruiters do more harm to young college student by recruiting them or do you think credit card companies do more harm to young college students by recruiting them?


    I think that is a pretty complex question, that can't be answered in this forum. Both the military recruiter and the credit card companies make it quite easy, and make it seem very inviting, to make decisions without giving it a whole lot of contemplation. They take advantage of people who need/ want money, and I do not think either of them would think a whole lot of themselves if they were in the position of a young college student who needs money. No, they do not force anyone to do anything, but their persuasion isn't honest either (just like most people's).

  9. #18
    Olympic Champ
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    It's a long way from East Colorado
    Posts
    3,740

    Default Re: Treasonous Berkley city council.

    Quote Originally Posted by UGLY View Post
    Clone I like how you attack my source but provide no source to refute mine. I did hear today that in light of the city losing federal and state aid the council has modified its verbage but not its attitude towards the marines.
    Why would I need a source to refute yours? I'm not disputing the general facts of the story, I'm challenging their bullshit rhetoric about Berkeley committing treason. On that basis, I can make arguments on my own two feet without anyone's help.

    You now tell us what the council wants: keep out the Marines, and on this basis you are going to condemn them? The fact does not escape me that many college campuses are opposed to the recruiters, as are numerous parents of high school students who have to sign a paper to keep recruiters from contacting their children. Are they all traitors too? You make a mockery of the concept by reprinting freerepublic's crap.

    Given a choice, I'd say credit card cos. are clearly the biggest threat on campus. I'd say it's a lot easier to avoid or say no to recruiters--especially on college campuses--they're not going to pursue you if you're not interested. The credit card cos. though, they're in your mailbox, and offering money ostensibly free or to be covered by another day or maybe your parents.

    As for the recruiters, there is this idea that we should not be subject to sales pitches against our will.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •