 | | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good —James Simpson
|
| | | (...) Larry: I'm glad that you spoke to Scott's comments. As soon as I read them yesterday, I tried to draft a reply that wasn't full of anger, but realized that I couldn't at the time, so I dropped it. I suppose that the jist of my reply to his (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good —Simon Bennett
|
| | | | | (...) Excellent point. Without wanting to appear like I am cavilling I wish people would stand back and think about how they would think had they not been so fortunate to be born in their native land. I see a hint of arrogance in Larry's assertion (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | Snipped everything I agree with, and the comments on the remaining should be viewed somewhat lightheartedly... (...) Well of course you do. You DID see my humility score, right? The US IS the best country in the world, but not to worry, the UK is (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good —Lawrence Wilkes
|
| | | | | | | | | "Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GL3vzG.1zB@lugnet.com... (...) There is no way that the US can be considered better than the UK. Name me one time ever you beat us at Cricket. lawrence (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Not Cricket (was Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | | | (...) Not ever even playing you... now that *in itself* proves our superiority. BTW you set FUT wrong... the very IDEA of Cricket is laughable so this is FUT .fun ++Lar (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Not Cricket (was Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | (...) BWAAAA! I can't disagree there. I did see some people playing cricket here in NJ down by the Raritan, which was a pretty odd spectacle; however, most of them were Indian, Bangladeshi, and/or Pakistani, and cricket *is* of course the consummate (...) (23 years ago, 12-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Not Cricket (was Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good —Adam Wood
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | "Larry Pieniazek" <lpieniazek@mercator.com> wrote in message news:GL3xM2.7E3@lugnet.com... (...) the (...) the (...) in the (...) Well if you're going by cricket loss/win, doesn't that make -Australia- somewhere near the top? Hell, it even puts New (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | | | (...) I'm pretty sure they have, did the USA not have a good cricket system in the 1800's? Scott A (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | "humility" —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I was not aware that there was a competition for the "best country in the world". If I were to choose, I doubt it would be the UK or the USA. I'd probably choose some small state which did not bully anyone, support human rights abuses - but (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: "humility" —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | | | | | (...) Iceland, if it weren't for the inability to avoid tobacco smoke, would be very near the top of my list. As I understand it, modern Iceland is a derivative of the only real-world example of Privately Produced Law. The have almost no crime. And (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Merits of Iceland (was Re: "humility" —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | | | | (...) *And* they have some majorly kickin' 4 wheel drives. One of the carmags I read on airplanes had a "one lap around X" article which they do as a regular feature, and the X in this case was Iceland. They hooked up with an outfit called Artic (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
| | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | Re: "humility" —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | | (...) I have no real idea about that, but I have a feeling their system of government is based on the Danish system. Perhaps I'm thinking of Greenland? (...) We almost had a war with Iceland - the cod war. Yes, it was all about fish: (URL)And no one (...) (23 years ago, 19-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: "Centuries old piece of paper" still pretty darn good —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | (...) Indeed. And rather than answer it - Larry deletes it! He needs to get his head out of the sand. Scott A (23 years ago, 14-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) I have made this point before: (URL) (...) Then perhaps you do not understand that the document is holding you hostage to reason and change. The gun debate is a good example of that. The fact remains that (as I understand it) GWB can erode (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | (...) That's a ridiculous statement. And it is so poorly supported by any meaningful argument as to be pointless to debate the matter. (...) No, that would be false. GWB might wish to errode my rights, but that would be what is so great about our (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) What I mean is that rather than debate these issues, we get an argument that goes like this: "It's in the constitution, so we can't change it". I find that "ridiculous". Here is an example: (URL) Gore declared that "the Constitution is a (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | (...) Well almost any kind of minor legal hassle can have the appearance of erroding my rights -- including a bill to stop terrorist activities. The real test comes in time, tested in the courts, and sometimes even retested in the courts. Sometimes (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) It does not sound all that great when you describe it like that? (...) I agree with some of what you say, but at times I think we get too hung up on property rights. (...) Thanks again for your comments. I think we *all* have good things to (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | (...) Well, that's human history for you then. It's not the case that your country has anything better to offer, I know. It's trial and error, and so on...sometimes justice doesn't come quickly, or even at all. The Constitution is NOT what the (...) (23 years ago, 15-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) The problem with your system is the huge inequalities in your country. Political power is bought and sold like cheese at a cheesemongers. People keep guns to protect themselves from there *own* government. Your healthcare system is derided (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Lindsay Frederick Braun
|
| | | | | (...) That's a gross overstatement, and a pretty glib generalization. influence, perhaps; but political *power* must be negotiated. And you don't think this happens in Britain? Please. You just don't talk about it quite the same way, in part because (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | (...) It was meant to be a caricature – and I said it was! (...) What I was talking about was how in the USA the main political parties are hugely indebted to their sponsors. On of the criticisms of GWB's NMD was that it was payback. Dan has alluded (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Richard Marchetti
|
| | | | | | (...) And reform in this area is coming -- give it time. Even the two party system is slowly but surely under attack. Again, time will correct these issues. As far as the whole gun thing goes: Sorry to disappoint you but I believe that the ruling (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | | (...) Mature democracies outlaw them. :-) (...) In my ideal there would be no charities. We can save that one for later. (...) Scotland - not really England - hmm London - Yes (...) GP on demand (walk-in clinic) Specialist in less than 1 month (I'm (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Public v Private Health Care (Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is") —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | | | (...) I looked at this a little more. The USA spends 12.9% of its GDP on health (highest in the world). The UK spends just 6.8% of GDP. France spends 9.3% and has the best Healthcare system - as rated by WHO (not the pop group). The UK system is (...) (23 years ago, 18-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | (...) Money is a form of power. You have more money, you have more power. I'm not talking about the United States, mind you, I'm talking about the world at large throughout history. I'll grant you it's pretty blatant here. (...) No, that's not (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) My comment was caricature. (...) I would say "free", but try to talk be round if you want! (...) They are freedoms to me... perhaps it is my culture. Scott A (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | (...) My point exactly, if not directly stated. (...) A bit garbled - I'm not quite sure what you are saying here. Sorry. But I think I address what you are trying to say below. (...) No, it's not you culture. The people of Chicago often noted that (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) I said it was a caricature in the message you replied to(!) :) (...) I would say "free", but try to talk me round if you want! (...) So you think I'm less free as I don't/can't have a gun, even though I would feel less free if I did have one? (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Bruce Schlickbernd
|
| | | | (...) I said nothing about guns in specific. Nor does this address what I said: you can give up a freedom for security. Okay, this is what you have done: you can't carry a gun, but you feel more secure because of it. You'd rather have the security (...) (23 years ago, 16-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: "The Constitution is what the judges say it is" —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) Hmm. I see your point. Secure means this: "able to avoid being harmed by any risk, danger or threat" Simply, free means this "not limited or controlled". I think the UK being "gun free", gives me both. I suppose another freedom I have lost (...) (23 years ago, 17-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
