Are You *ANGRY*, Yet?!?

Stephen A. Frye s.frye at VERIZON.NET
Thu Oct 25 20:44:43 MDT 2007

>         YOU come on, Stephen! I posted a piece on government 
> handouts and wasted tax dollars - all of a sudden I'm some sort of 
> prejudiced goofball...............

John, that's enough.  Nowhere, at any time did I say, write, imply, 
suggest that you are prejudiced, a goofball, anything.  That is a 
totally inappropriate comment from you, and it is childish misbehavior.

>>This has gone past absurd. I read that you believe that poverty 
>>cannot lead to crime.
>         I stand by that claim, too.

Stand where you want.

>>I believe that it can. I believe that many impoverished are 
>>desperate, and I believe that desperate people can do desperate 
>>things. You disagree.
>         Because I know better! I've been around many economically 
> deprived people - both here and off-shore. There are obvious signs 
> that suggest to me that crime - specifically street gangs (which is 
> what fueled this exchange in the first doggone place) - is a 
> culturally-driven thing.

And I know better, too.  I, too, have experiences and have seen things.

No, John.  Street gangs did NOT fuel this.  What fueled this was my 
overt reaction to the article that you cited which singled out 
Mexicans.  You brought up gangs all on your own.

>>We can't point a finger and relieve ourselves of responsibility. We 
>>squirm at that thought. Am I accusing you of doing that. No? Are 
>>you doing that? I don't know, and I don't care.
>         My conscience is clear......................

Good for you.  That's wonderful.  And I mean that sincerely.  I don't 
have time in my life to even begin to try to judge someone else along 
these lines.

>>>>There are no guarantees - ever (save death and taxes.) I never 
>>>>made a claim to the contrary.
>>>         I'm just pointing out that even the best-known causes of 
>>> gang membership don't always mean that gangs are an inevitable consequence.
>>I never claimed that anything is inevitable.
>>>>>>And don't go off the deep end being so sure you have seen the 
>>>>>>worst there is to see.
>>>>>         I didn't before, although I don't know how much worse 
>>>>> conditions can be than those I witnessed in Jamaica. I was 
>>>>> making a point - one that you simply refuse to accept.
>>>>Come on, John. You're above this.
>>>         Above WHAT? Calling another out on a mistaken notion? 
>>> Please.................

Telling me that I refuse to accept something when I have witnessed it 
to the contrary.

>>All right. I spoke, just today (based solely on this exchange) with 
>>a Jamaican native. He totally disagrees with your claims. Not about 
>>the poverty you saw, just about the related crime). But he only was 
>>born there, and grew up there. What could he possibly know?
>         Gee whiz, Batman! I'm not sure! Get him on-line and we can 
> interrogate him.................

So is it me, or is it him that you don't believe?  Or is it simply 
that someone has personal experience that questions your claim?  And 
more importantly, if you were face to face and he held firm, would 
you believe him?  Besides, it is not relevant.  This whole thing 
about gangs in other countries is a deflective thread you created and 
that you are perpetuating.

>         Let's disagree and say that poverty isn't a major factor. 
> Can we do that?

No, because I believe poverty can be an awesome contributing factor.

>>You don't believe that. Impasse.
>         Mexican standoff, no pun intended..............................
>>Like any other discussion of religion or politics, neither side 
>>ever bends. Are you going to change your mind? Not likely. Me? Not 
>>likely either. Proof? Society, especially on the world level, is 
>>extremely complex and there are infinite interactions. Proof isn't 
>>possible. 'Prove it" is something we used to scream at each other as kids.
>         We need to lean on solid evidence a whale of a lot more as 
> adults, I'll tell you that.................

Hmmm.  When do think we'll all start that?  I've been in this group 
for about 14 years.  I have seen dozens, if not hundreds, of 
accusations fly and perpetuate with absolutely no evidence.

>         Proof is about the only thing that will make a believer out 
> of me. I am like my mother.......a born skeptic.
>>I liked all fields of math EXCEPT Geometry. All those proofs. Yuck.
>         Where would we be without geometry?!?
>>I think poverty can lead to crime.
>>I think our morality is totally sad at best.
>         That's a cultural thing, too. Our morality went down in 
> flames during the "anything goes '60s."

yep.  And we keep tying more weights to it.

>>I think Bush is the biggest boob the white house has ever seen.
>         I disagree with Bush on a number of key issues - the 
> borders being just one of them. However, I believe that FDR was a 
> bigger boob and violated the Constitution more often.

Could be.  I can't debate that.  But I do believe that history will 
reveal even more boobiness about "W".

>>I think the illegal alien problem is real, but was also a very 
>>strategic (and very successful) decoy by the three stooges to draw 
>>attention away form the utter failure in Iraq.
>         I don't see the "utter failure" in Iraq, either. We deposed 
> a dangerous man. We've been able to neutralize many of the Al Qaeda 
> leaders. We turned around and built that country schools, utilities 
> and gave them freedom like they've never known.

Some of the generals argue with that.  My son served in the middle 
east.  MY other son's best friend is on his third (mandatory) tour over there.

>>I think abortion is wrong.
>         Without question............
>>I am in favor of the death penalty - had quite an opportunity to 
>>probe the depths of my own conscience as foreman of a jury on a 
>>four month trial seeking the death penalty.
>>I think Bush is a disgrace (but I repeat myself).
>>I think we'll see a national sales tax/consumption tax, but it will 
>>really bite the boomers. The list goes on, and I am pretty darned 
>>well set in all of these.
>         I doubt very seriously that we'll see a consumption tax - 
> especially if the Hilldebeast occupies the WH. She's the female 
> version of Karl Marx.
>>>>Everything I wrote derived form the article YOU cited about 
>>>>schools in the U.S. Neither the article nor my comments 
>>>>encompassed what you saw in other countries.
>>>         The article was about government handouts and wasted tax 
>>> dollars............
>>Singling out the Mexicans and their conduct in classrooms, 
>>witnessed by a single author.
>         Who happened to be an administrator at that particular 
> school.......................

Like I wrote - singling out Mexicans.  That administrator may have 
been writing about a single school, but the author did so with 
sweeping generalizations.

>>Population concentrations are also greater in these big cities, as 
>>are concentrations of ghettos etc. And my Jamaican co-worker says 
>>there are gangs. He's likely wrong, huh?
>         I saw none and neither did my daughter, during her visit in 
> July. Again, that means nothing, right?

Your daughter visited in July.  you visited at some time for likely a 
short period of time.  he lived there for 30 years.

>>>>if you are claiming there are NO gangs, then you're blind to it.
>>>         In the Caribbean?!? Don't make me laugh! I went all 
>>> through the Caribbean and there was no trace of street gangs and 
>>> related violence anywhere!
>>See above.
>>>>Crime is driven by many things.
>>>         Crime is sin, Stephen. Sin is the product of a wicked heart.
>>I never claimed it wasn't a sin. But severe hunger can (doesn't 
>>always) (so sad to have to delimit everything) lead a person to 
>>otherwise abnormal - illegal - behavior.
>         I can only comment on what I own life, 
> my parents' lives and grandparents..............

Ahhh.  We are making progress.  Your claims, then, lie solely within 
your scope of direct observation and experience.  That is excellent 

>>>>Your claim here is great for allowing us to not try to correct 
>>>>it, but rather to turn a blind eye.
>>>         By throwing money at it?!? Is this corrective??? I 
>>> sincerely beg to differ and I'm sure there are stats to show that 
>>> federal spending in the inner cities has EXACERBATED the problem, 
>>> not corrected it! In 1965, Lyndon Johnson boldly predicted that 
>>> "poverty could be completely wiped out by $10-million in federal 
>>> spending." Here we are, 42 years and well-beyond $100-million 
>>> later and........well, whaddya know?!? Poverty is STILL there! 
>>> How'd that happen, anyway?
>>Get off this "throw money at it" line.
>         YOU'RE making the allegation that we've turned a blind eye 
> to it............

yes, I did.  Please point to where I mentioned anything at all about 
throwing money at it.  One citing would be fine.

>>I do not believe that we as Christians have fulfilled our Savior's 
>>commandment to Love one Another as He has loved us.
>         In what way?

In any way.

>>>>Trying to better the situation takes that good old "Love one 
>>>>another" statement left us by our Savior, and, I am sad to say, 
>>>>we aren't too darned good at it; it just ain't convenient.
>>>         Well, love equals money........sonuvagun!! Who knew?!? 
>>> How's this grab you.......according to the Brookings Institute (a 
>>> liberal thinktank), America spent $137-BILLION for public 
>>> assistance in 1988 ALONE! Brookings whines unhappily that less 
>>> that a third of that was paid out in cash, however. The rest was 
>>> distributed through in-kind transfer programs like food stamps, 
>>> housing vouchers, and Medicaid, which can be used only for buying 
>>> food, housing, and medical care, respectively.
>>Here you go again. Stop putting words in my mouth.
>         Then, EXPLAIN yourself...................

I don't have all of the answers, John.  never claimed to.  But I do 
know we are the richest, smartest, best off people in the world, and 
I believe that each of us will be asked what we did with that great 
gift to better those less fortunate.  I believe that with all of my 
heart.  I don't know that I am ready to answer that.  Frankly, I 
don't care one way or another abut anyone else answering that.  It's 
not my place.  I believe that in a nation so rich, it's wrong for 
people to be hungry.  I think it's wrong for people to die and suffer 
because they don't have enough money. NO NO NO NO NO NO.  I am not 
asking you to pay for anything or to throw money at it.  I don't know 
the best answer.  On the other hand, I believe we should put as much 
energy into finding the answer as we do into killing, war, football, 
baseball, etc.  I firmly believe that poverty is something we will 
never fully conquer.  But even more I believe that is NOT an excuse 
to not constantly, relentlessly try to accomplish.  I wish I had an 
answer.  I don't.  But then again, maybe that's part of the challenge 
we were given.  Find it.

I've been doing that all along.  You disagree.  I have no problem with that.

>         Pardon me, while I don the sackcloth and ashes, sit myself 
> down in a corner with a duncecap on and feel unabashed shame..............

We should all do it.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list