[Grubb's] Random Thoughts of the Day

SoDeepPolaris · Post by **SoDeepPolaris** » Mon May 09, 2005 7:09 am

First off, I was not trying to insult you in any way, nor was my post in any way, shape or form in the nature of a threat.

Obviously we aren't going to agree on this subject, but my view still stands.

Liberals want a stronger government to assist the people.
Conservatives want to keep their money and some, their religious beliefs, and that's their use for the government.
Just remember modern day Democrats are MUCH different than the democrats of the mid 1800's, even early 1900's. Southern Democrats were those who imposed all the black codes and ignored lynchings. They were bigots and not at all the modern day "liberals" you think all democrats are.

By the way, I'm not conservative.

Original Sin · Post by **Original Sin** » Mon May 09, 2005 7:17 am

The parties mean nothing, and do only what will spite the other. They will do whatever is convenient, what opposes the other party.
In my opinion, they're both worthless. They both stand for strong government control, the only difference is the way they want that control, and on what issues they see it should be applied.
Liberals want the government to mandate charity, essentially. More welfare, more healthcare, etc etc.
Conservatives want to keep their money, but enforce their traditional and religious views into the system.
Either party stands for control, the only difference is what KIND of control.

Mosh_Mosh_Revolution · Mon May 09, 2005 8:01 am

Wow, speaking of the government, I'm being dragged off to get my wisdom teeth pulled! =D

>_<

Grubb · Post by **Grubb** » Mon May 09, 2005 8:09 am

SoDeepPolaris wrote:First off, I was not trying to insult you in any way, nor was my post in any way, shape or form in the nature of a threat.

Obviously we aren't going to agree on this subject, but my view still stands.

Liberals want a stronger government to assist the people.
Conservatives want to keep their money and some, their religious beliefs, and that's their use for the government.
Just remember modern day Democrats are MUCH different than the democrats of the mid 1800's, even early 1900's. Southern Democrats were those who imposed all the black codes and ignored lynchings. They were bigots and not at all the modern day "liberals" you think all democrats are.

By the way, I'm not conservative.

First of all, only my first paragraph of my previous posted was directed towards you (SoDeep). The rest of it was for x5060. If anything, I was trying to correct x5060 and if I offended you, then I am sorry. My goal was to correct him of his obvious mistakes, which appeared to be little more than him trying to be a Mr. Know-it-all.

Second, the things you have said are correct. However, you don't seem to see the entire picture. You acknowledge the fact that the two Political Parties as a whole have changed a lot over the centuries.

This thing is that you fail to acknowledge the basic veiwpoint that makes political parties what they are, That is that the Democratic Party is traditionally aginst the government having too much control, where as the Republican Party is traditionally aginst the government not having enough control.

When placing youself on one side or another on a political veiw, chances are, your choice is either going to be Liberal (Usually the choice that infringes on personal freedoms the least) or Conservative (The choice that infringe on personal freedoms, but preforms some other fuction). Most people are not totally for one or the other, but somewhere inbetween.

I know there are as many ways of looking at US politics are there are people in the world, and then some. But fundamentally, if you find yourself making the liberal choice more often than the conservative one, then chances are you'd be happier hanging with the Democrats. And if you find yourself making the conservative one more often, then chances are you'd be happier with the Republicans. Beyond that, there are countless other veiwpoints within the parties, "Sub-parties" if you will. But I don't have the time, energy, nor need to get into that right now.

To sum up what I've been trying to say, I'll go back to one of my previous posts.

Anarchy = No Goverment Control

Liberal = Some Goverment Control

Conservitive = Lots of Goverment Control

Communism = Compleate Goverment Control

x5060 · Post by **x5060** » Mon May 09, 2005 8:29 am

Grubb wrote: x5060,

Also, your only reasons for saying otherwise would be.

A) A simple mistake on your part.

B) If your republican, your might be uncomfortable with the "Conservative" being compaired with something as dreadful as Communism.

C) You felt the need to try and prove me wrong, dispite your lack of knowledge on the subject.

D) You felt it was your turn to start insulting me, as many people on this site have felt.

E) Any combonation of the above.

A) Unless ive been lied to by several non-partisan political analystis then i might be. But who would want to believe an expert =\

B) And who would want to be compaired to anarchy? yeah, that system has had a rich history of success. Take a look at lyberia, colombia, somalia, no REAL government to speak of.

C) A personal attack?

D) im not insulting you grubb, you know me, and im not that kind of guy. I was simply trying to show you the diffrences of the parties. Did you even READ the website i showed you?

Original Sin · Post by **Original Sin** » Mon May 09, 2005 8:41 am

With all this mention of anarchy, I just have to say it.
I'm sure you've all, at least once, encountered one of the anti-government punks, going on about how 'anarchy is the way!'

I really, really don't think they realize what they're saying.
As was mentioned, take a look at Somalia, and the other countries
on the list. They're run by war lords and gangs. Anarchy is, essentially,
who ever has the biggest guns and the most followers wins.
You're not abolishing government, you're making way for someone else
to come along and take control by force, and I can guarantee. GUARANTEE, you will be worse off than you are now when you look at the over all picture.

Ok. End rant.

malictus · Post by **malictus** » Mon May 09, 2005 9:34 am

Original Sin wrote:With all this mention of anarchy, I just have to say it.
I'm sure you've all, at least once, encountered one of the anti-government punks, going on about how 'anarchy is the way!'

I really, really don't think they realize what they're saying.
As was mentioned, take a look at Somalia, and the other countries
on the list. They're run by war lords and gangs. Anarchy is, essentially,
who ever has the biggest guns and the most followers wins.
You're not abolishing government, you're making way for someone else
to come along and take control by force, and I can guarantee. GUARANTEE, you will be worse off than you are now when you look at the over all picture.

Ok. End rant.

Very, very true words....

But, wait isn't this supposed to be Random Thoughts?? So here's one: don't waste your money on renting the movie Darkness, it's HORRIBLE

Mosh_Mosh_Revolution · Mon May 09, 2005 3:53 pm

Ooo, another random thought, don't watch Family Guy with your mom. She won't get it.

P.S. Teeth went great. n_n No horror stories from me.

Original Sin · Post by **Original Sin** » Mon May 09, 2005 3:54 pm

Yes...yes it is.

Pumeleon · Post by **Pumeleon** » Mon May 09, 2005 3:55 pm

Never buy a scsi drive until you know more about scsi than you ever would want to know. ;_;

hascoolnickname · Post by **hascoolnickname** » Mon May 09, 2005 4:39 pm

what'd you do?

Pumeleon · Post by **Pumeleon** » Mon May 09, 2005 4:47 pm

Well, I was building the computers that will run stepmania in my solo cabinets... and I accidentally ordered a scsi drive. No problem, I thought... I'll learn about SCSI and get a controller.

Well, there turned out to be fifty billion kinds of SCSI, and even more kinds of connectors.

I have some SCSI Ultra4/Ultra320 drives, so I ordered a controller.
It got here, and it wasn't PCI... I thought for CERTAIN that it was PCI! I looked again, and it didn't say PCI.

Thankfully, I found some Ultra3 (PCI) controllers (which are fully compatible with Ultra4) and I ordered them.

Now I hope they can take the non-pci controllers back. ;_;

On the upshot: SCSI Ultra 3 is faster than IDE, and works with Linux just as well.

On the downshot: I wasted about $80 when I could have just used IDE drives.

Potter · Post by **Potter** » Mon May 09, 2005 5:04 pm

x5060 · Post by **x5060** » Mon May 09, 2005 5:12 pm

Pumeleon wrote:Well, I was building the computers that will run stepmania in my solo cabinets... and I accidentally ordered a scsi drive. No problem, I thought... I'll learn about SCSI and get a controller.

Well, there turned out to be fifty billion kinds of SCSI, and even more kinds of connectors.

I have some SCSI Ultra4/Ultra320 drives, so I ordered a controller.
It got here, and it wasn't PCI... I thought for CERTAIN that it was PCI! I looked again, and it didn't say PCI.

Thankfully, I found some Ultra3 (PCI) controllers (which are fully compatible with Ultra4) and I ordered them.

Now I hope they can take the non-pci controllers back. ;_;

On the upshot: SCSI Ultra 3 is faster than IDE, and works with Linux just as well.

On the downshot: I wasted about $80 when I could have just used IDE drives.

SCSI isnt bad when you get used to it. of course you have your Ultra series SCSI, Wide series SCSI, standered SCSI, Fast SCSI, Fast Wide SCSI, Ultra Fast SCSI, Ultra Wide SCSI, and any other combination of the words Ultra, Wide, and Fast SCSI. Also what kind of linux are you running?

And potter SATA cant approach the speeds of the higher end SCSI's. Not too mention the fact that you can

A) fit 254 drives on 1 SCSI header
B) you cant read and write simultanously to all drives on SCSI

Original Sin · Post by **Original Sin** » Mon May 09, 2005 5:35 pm

I have a computer.