Sunday, August 14, 2011

The Belief System

I have been visiting a few political blogs lately. This post is to clear up any confusion anyone might have......................Here we go...................................
1/ Religion----I am agnostic, however I do not judge those who are religious. I was born into a Methodist family, but I was baptized Lutheran. My Daughter was baptized Catholic, and I take her to Catholic church every other Sunday. I will give her all tools of knowledge that I have and let her choose for herself. Their wasn't any event that shaped my beliefs. I'm just a seein' is believin' kind a guy. I do believe in evolution, but I am always doing internet research on the subject. I'm open to anything..............................................................................
2/ Abortion---- I do believe that in cases of incest, rape, or severe mental defects, abortion should be legal. I do not think abortion should be used as birth control. That just makes you a piece of shit.I'm not sure if you can ban abortion in certain cases and not in others. But if so, I'm all set.
3/ Welfare---- Why should tax money be given to people for doing nothing. Why not force welfare recipients to work. Maybe cutting grass on deserted forest preserve roads that normally would not be done. Maybe emptying city garbage cans. Welfare seems to promote laziness and dependency. Sorry my liberal friends, but I see it everyday in the neighborhoods I drive through..................................................................................
4/ Guns----If you can pass testing, and traing courses, why not? The knowledge that criminals have regarding law-abiding citizens not carrying guns, only makes those citizens possible victims. If we can prevent criminals from being able to purchase guns on the street or at shows, then F##king do it already. Until then, why should I not be able to protect myself and my family? Please do not try to argue assault weapons. I got news for ya. A little .22 revolver is an assault weapon.
5/ Taxes---- Still trying to figure out what I would like to see happen. But, definitely needs changing............................................................................................................
6/ Military---- I never served, so it's hard for me to decide. But I lean towards yes, The man in charge of the military should have served in the military. Don't ever ask a man to do something you would never do................................................................................................
7/ Homosexuality---- Really. Who cares.... Their are so many other things wrong with this country, why do we care if a man loves a man, or a women loves a women.........................
Those are the major topics I can think of for now. If I forgot one, Please let me know.

34 comments:

  1. It it good to know a bit more about you, JOB. Interestingly, we share several beliefs.

    I have a comment about #6. You state, The man in charge of the military should have served in the military. You do know that the Joint Chiefs of Staff are 'in charge' of the Military and they are all military men.

    I hope that you were not suggesting that the President, the Commander-in-Chief, be ex-military. If so, we would have been denied many outstanding former presidents.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Like who, Mud? Lincoln? Nope, a vet. Carter? Hah, not an outstanding CIC, but yes, a vet. Kennedy? A vet. Pick one and defend his record as Commander-in-Chief. The only two in my lifetime with no military service are Bill Clinton and Barak Obama. Clinton screwed the pooch on terrorists like Osama, and Obama is currently in violation of the War Powers Act of 1973. So tell us, Mud. Who would we have missed out on?

    ReplyDelete
  3. J.O.B.,

    We agree on about 60-65%. I'd call that close enough to be countrymen. If only the nimrods in DC could agree on that type of scale.

    Apparently Mud agrees with you on about the same, but he and I only agree on about 35%. He's too left, and I'm too right. I guess that puts you in the middle, like kids in a divorce. Sorry we're doing that to you.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I hate to keep challenging your vast knowledge, Tenth, but there were several presidents who did not serve in the military.

    Were you asleep or were you shooting spitballs during your American History classes, Tenth>

    Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Franklin Roosevelt, Herbert Hoover, Calvin Coolidge, Warren Harding, Woodrow Wilson, William Taft, Grover Cleveland, Martin Van Buren, John Q. Adams and John Adams.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mud_ I might have been suggesting that. I might be wrong. I admit that my ideas are based alot on a common sence approach. I am not sure right now what great past Presidents you were referring to. But you might be right. But I'm guessing that wartime morale is alot higher for troops, if they're getting their marching order from a former serviceman, and not JUST a politician........

    TGP- Thanks for the comment. I too, am happy to call you a countryman. maybe we can have future friendly debates on the differences. Possibly move up to 75%

    ReplyDelete
  6. That is an impressive list Mud- Thanks my man..........REALLY the Adams'? I guess I slept alot through History.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I'd rank them in this descending order of 'greatness'

    FD Roosevelt
    John Adams
    Woodrow Wilson

    I would counter these with a presidents who HAVE served and were fairly terrible:

    GW Bush
    Richard Nixon
    Jimmy Carter
    U.S. Grant

    ReplyDelete
  8. Mud,

    That's a start. At least Carter is on your terrible list.

    FD Roosevelt never served on active duty, but did serve as an undersecretary of the Navy. Not quite the same as serving, I would not give that credit to Dick Cheney, but Roosevelt suffered from polio and may have had an excuse for not serving. Cheney was simply a draft dodger, like Bill Clinton.

    I'm not sure where I stand on Tricky Dick. I think I would agree with you that he was bad for the country, but unless you are saying his drawdown of Vietnam was a bad move, he doesn't fit the argument here. He does fit mine, cause I think he should have increased our troop strength in Vietnam and then played to win. Remember he "inherited" the war from the Democrats.

    US Grant was a poor President, but I think pretty highly of GW Bush. I also really liked his dad.

    John Adams served on a US Navy frigate as supercargo on his way to France, he actually did have one combat engagement with the Royal Navy. Also not quite the same, but it helps show his strength of character.

    From my side of the political spectrum, Woodrow Wilson was a horrible President, but That is my opinion.

    I was not asleep in my US History classes. In fact, I often had to correct my teachers when they recited typos in the textbook as historical fact. I said that in my lifetime, there has only been two Presidents without military service. Notice on your list, Barak Obama, Bill Clinton. Next one back is FDR, and sorry Mud, I ain't that old.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Nice rebuttal TGP. Did YOU ever serve during wartime or any kind of hostile engagement. I'm looking to a former Marine here to answer my question.......Do you think war-time moral is lower if the commander-in-chief never served in the armed forces?

    ReplyDelete
  10. J.O.B.,

    I still live around and engage with a lot of active duty Marines. All of them that I have talked to, including the minority blacks and Hispanics, dislike Obama because they don't feel he understands their commitment to freedom.

    I served in the first Gulf War, and while I freely admit it was a cakewalk, there were hostile bullets flying around. In that engagement, we were all pissed that Bush the First called us off before the job was done. So the military experience of the CIC might not be that important, Obama has continued the fight where Bush I quit, right?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Tenth writes, but I think pretty highly of GW Bush.

    You can think highly of GW Bush or Betty White, but that does not make either an effective president. Neither you opinion nor my opinion matter. I leave that to the historians and experts in this arena.

    It really is a shame, Tenth, that you are so hateful to President Obama. Because of this intense hate, your credibility is zero on everything else that you say or post.

    Regarding your military buddies near the base, that is hardly a scientific sampling of 'the military' and its opinion of the Commander-in-Chief.

    This is precisely where you fall down on credibility, not only on this one issue but on nearly everything that you profess. You have a narrow and like-minded group of people with whom you share opinions and then proclaim that EVERYBODY believes X or Y.

    You are way-too insular to be an effectiv, credible blogger. JOB, on the other hand, is dipping into both left and right-leaning blogs in order to get a sense of important issues.

    Sadly, TEnth, you visit your pal's blogs- all like-minded- and then assume that all of America believes what the 5 of you are posting.

    I'm going to do a post today comparing the military effectiveness of GW Bush and Barack Obama. You, sad to say, will either not read it or will have so much [unfounded] hate for Obama that you will not be able to understand or accept the point that I am making in comparing these two presidents.

    By the way, why DO you have so much obvious hate for Obama? What did he do that makes you loathe him so intensely?

    ReplyDelete
  12. J.O.B.,

    Let me throw in my two cents worth in no particular order. 6/ Military.

    I can tell you that we in the military struggle with this one. My Marines universally were disgusted by Bill Clinton. I don’t think it was so much that he was a draft dodger and coward, but more because he had absolutely no honor and he was a pathological liar. In his position as Commander in Chief he got away with a variety of things for which an active duty officer could have been prosecuted or forced out of the military for. I think that it was unfair for the American people to allow such a disgusting human being to be President and Commander in Chief. The way that the Clintons treated military people who were around them to help and protect them was scandalous as well.

    I know that honor and courage are passé for many folks today – but it is still an essential lynchpin in the military. People like Clinton have no idea.

    Harry Truman was a military vet but he was a horrible Commander in Chief. I think that Harry learned all the wrong lessons. He was relatively low on the food chain during World War I and his take away seemed to be that all generals were stupid Prim Donnas. Truman felt that somehow a home-spun upstart of little accomplishment or experience like him was better able to make momentous decisions. The conflict between Douglas MacArthur and Truman is well known (though little understood) – what is less well known is what has been referred to as the “Revolt of the Admirals.” That was caused by the confluence of an exceptionally poor Commander in Chief (Truman) and a horrible Secretary of Defense (Louis A. Johnson). Good book – “Revolt of the Admirals; The Fight for Naval Aviation 1945-50” by Jeffery G. Barlow.

    The military experience of Ronald Reagan, Abraham Lincoln, and George W. Bush are hardly remarkable but made for exceptional Commanders in Chief. The military experience of George H. Bush was exceptional and paid off in the White House.

    Barack Obama is of course (like Truman) a man of no experience and little accomplishment. He did have some competent people around him (Generals Jim Jones, Stanley McChrystal, and David Patraeus - two of those are gone) but there is little evidence that he actually listened to them. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates is an adequate manager but not a very inspiring or far-thinking leader and he was paired with an ignorant “yes-man” in Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Admiral Michael Mullen.

    That might get to the core of your issue. If a President doesn’t have the background or experience to make good decisions (like Obama) you compound the problem with either an unwillingness or inability to listen to good advice. The problem becomes a disaster if you surround yourself with people who think like you or don’t think at all. That may be where we are today. I think that Obama may have a filter like Truman that makes him think he’s smarter than everyone else – when all the evidence points to the opposite conclusion. That has of course been a disaster for America.

    Sorry for the length - but people do write entire books on this topic.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Mud,

    My "opinion" of GW Bush is colored through the prism of my service to this country. My father is one of the most famous living Marines. Growing up in his house exposed me to a lot of war heroes. I think my "opinion" is much more well informed than the average American on this subject.

    I read your blog, Mud. I rarely take anything away from it. I thought the obit on Cleo Johnson was a nice touch, but then you admit you didn't post it, so it now does not add to my "opinion" of you.

    Suppose you tell me how to do a "scientific" sampling of our servicemen. In addition to living around the Marines of Camp Lejeune, I also frequently deliver chicken coops to the soldiers of Fort Bragg. There, also, the "opinion" of the men serving under Obama is that he is a useless turd. But please, tell me how to make my "sampling" a little more "scientific."

    What Obama "did" that makes me loathe him so, is more about what he is. He is a socialist, Mud, and to me, that is a dirty word. I grew up in a society that dedicated themselves to the destruction of Socialism, and it galls me to death that America elected a socialist only 17 years after we, and I mean me and Sepp and Common Sense and the Gunny and all of the other servicemen defeated the Soviets. On top of that, when I see him say things like, "I'll work on a jobs plan next month" or "I'm sitting out the month" while millions of Americans are suffering in the worst economic times since the Great Depression (no matter who caused it) I want him fired for doing nothing. He is a sorry POS, and your blind allegiance to him is ridiculous.

    Sorry, J.O.B., I'm really not trying to pick a fight, but Mud really rubs me the wrong way.

    ReplyDelete
  14. TGP... Your input on CIC was very valuable.....Between you and Mud, I do believe my opinion may be shifting.
    As far as the bickering with Mud, no need to apologize. I'm sure the feelings are mutual. But I'm sure you're both cool with that

    Mud....Thank you for your input as well. It is appreciated.

    Last but not least, CS.....You take up all the space you need. Very informative, and much appreciated.

    ReplyDelete
  15. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  16. J.O.B.,

    How's that for discussing the issues? Nothing in his post to back up his "opinion". Nothing but hate filled insults with no facts to back them up.

    Can you see any "challenge" to my "idiotic statements"? I don't.

    Mud, whats with the "check wikipedia"? As I recall, when I cited wikipedia on my blog, you and Jeffio laughed and said it "was not a reliable source." You guys are funny. And once again, you refuse to quit insulting peoples mothers.

    From wikipedia:

    Opinion polls for many years were maintained through telecommunications or in person-to-person contact. Methods and techniques vary, though they are widely accepted in most areas. Verbal, ballot, and processed types can be conducted efficiently,

    What that says, Mr. Smart Guy, is that conducting a poll by verbally asking a sample group is an acceptable means of polling. So how would you conduct a scientific poll of our troops?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Oh, yeah, Mud:

    so·cial·ism   
    [soh-shuh-liz-uhm] Show IPA
    –noun
    1.
    a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
    2.
    procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
    3.
    (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.


    so·cial·ist   [soh-shuh-list] Show IPA
    noun
    1.
    an advocate or supporter of socialism.
    2.
    ( initial capital letter ) a member of the U.S. Socialist party

    You tell me how Obama don't fit those definitions. If you don't see the connections, you are truly ignorant.

    ReplyDelete
  18. . If you don't see the connections, you are truly ignorant.

    I'd be very careful, Tenth, throwing around accusations of ignorance. What's that proverb about not throwing stones in a glass house?

    Wikipedia is a very good reference source. Apparently you have me confused with someone else. I use it all of the time.

    Socialism ( /ˈsoʊ̯ʃəɫɪzm̩/) is an economic system in which the means of production are publicly or commonly owned and controlled cooperatively; or a political philosophy advocating such a system. [Wikipedia]

    Why didn't you use Wikipedia as I linked it?

    So, tell me, Tenth, how has the past three years of the Obama Administration demonstrated the means of production are publicly or commonly owned and controlled cooperatively?

    Please cite several examples of publicly or commonly owned means of production that have been put into place by this administration.

    Go ahead.

    Meanwhile, about opinion polling. Apparently you will need to stay after class [GED class] to help with the 4th grade reading outcome, 'reading for details.' In the linked Wikipedia article it says, where a sample is drawn from a large panel of volunteers, and the results are weighed to reflect the demographics of the population of interest. In contrast, popular web polls draw on whoever wishes to participate, rather than a scientific sample of the population, and are therefore not generally considered professional.

    By the way, the "popular web poll" to which they refer is like the one that you posted on your blog page. Similarly, asking a group of friends [military pals] is in the same category- unscientific.

    A scientific poll is weighted mathematically and demographically, but that is a lesson further down the road for you.

    Any questions?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Mud,

    How is the control of so much of the economy not socialism? Obamacare is socialism in that the health care system becomes "commonly owned or cooperatively controlled." Government (or General) Motors is a good example. This regime has no self-restraint in interfering with the means of production through regulation, tax advantage, or stimulation. Cash for clunkers and caulkers are good examples of socialism. The government crashed the housing market by directing banks and other financial institutions to make loans that they otherwise would not have made.

    You are honing in on "ownership" which is irrelevant if government has "control." The stockholders and leadership of a bank become irrelevant if the government can make them through regulation and intimidation make bad loans.

    No one seriously questions the fact that Obama is a socialist - I don't understand your issue - I would have thought that you all would wear that badge with pride. It's what you've fought for - why not embrace it?

    Is it because it is such a spectacular failure?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Mud,

    She's fine and she thinks that both you and Obama are socialists. Why don't you revel in it instead of running away from it?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Mud- I'm going to ask nicely. Please to not insult family members of commenters

    ReplyDelete
  22. J.O.B.

    He can't help himself - when one has a morally and intellectually bankrupt argument - insult and innuendo is their only recourse.

    Liberals (democrats, socialists, progressives, whatever) got exactly what they said they wanted all this time and pitched our economy, reputation, and future right into the toilet. It's what we on the Right have always said would happen - and it did. They have nowhere to run.

    You are too young to remember Jimmy Carter except as a senile old fool. The mess he left behind was worse by every objective measure than the mess that Nancy Pelosi handed to Barack Obama - Ronald Reagan fired up the US engine and turned it around on a dime. President Perry will do the same thing.

    The only way a democrat will get into the White House for the next 12-16 is to be an invited guest of a Republican President and America will prosper again.

    ReplyDelete
  23. CS--- I'm glad you mentioned Carter. I was too young, but I remember my Father fuckin hated him. My Dad was a Teamster, and I remember him talking about Carter regulating trucking......Do you know what that was all about. Unfortunately he has since past, so I can't ask him

    ReplyDelete
  24. Mud- I accidentaly deleted all of one of your comments. I'm trying to figure out how to delete just 1 sentence. My apologies, but until I figure it out, no more family bashing..

    ReplyDelete
  25. J.O.B.,

    Carter was a pathetic creature. The only good thing he did was deregulate the sale of malt and hops giving a shot in the arm to the home brewed beer hobby.

    I don't know specifically about trucking regulations, but it was Cater's actions that made Reagan quip about government "If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it." Carter faced an energy "crisis" and he worked very hard to make it worse - I'm sure that if your Dad was involved in the trucking industry he had good reason to hate Carter as anyone who buys a gallon of gas does.

    Carter created the Energy department and the Education department - both of which are colossal failures.

    Everything that Jimmy touched turned to crap, he did the exact opposite of what was required by every situation and then told us to get used to the pain. When people talk about Barack Obama being "Jimmy Carter's second term" that's why.

    Barack Obama however turned out to be Jimmy Carter on steroids.

    ReplyDelete
  26. J.O.B. said...
    Mud- I'm going to ask nicely. Please to not insult family members of commenters.

    I am not 'insulting' CS's mother. I m insulting CS. CS is the one who posted the statement that I was banned from posting comments on his blog because 'they offended his good Christian mother who often reads his blog.'

    Of course, that was complete bull shit but it was cute cover or his inability to duel with me on the issues. He and many of his far-right gang members moderate comments so that there are no opposing views to which they have to contend. "Pathetic" doesn't even come close to describing CS's chicken-shit whining and using his mommy as an 'excuse' for banning me from his blog.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Tenth- do you 'have any questions' regarding my last counter to your comment? I realize that CS jumped into where he didn't belong, but he has habit of doing things like that.

    My last comment to you was 8 comments above, if you can find it among all of the CS blather.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Mud,

    My "polling" of local military members is not a "group of friends." I run into complete strangers all the time who are servicemen. We engage in conversations about mundane things like the weather. I often ask these Marines about deployments because that is what we Marines like to talk about. Without fail, the conversation always turn to politics, and your guy gets abused. He deserves it. I cannot recall a single Marine that has approved of Obama. I did some work for the wife of a Major General, who turned out to be a retired Army Colonel. She approved of Obama when he first won the White House, and she said we should give him a chance. She has since changed her story to we have to get him out of there before he completely ruins the country. If it matters at all to you, she and her husband are both black.

    I don't have any questions regarding your post. I didn't use the Wikipedia source you cited because it was wrong. Obama IS a socialist, to deny it just makes you look stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  29. J.O.B.,

    Have you noted any unwillingness on my part to "duel" with Mud_Sling?

    Why pray tell is it so important for Mud_Sling to run around the internet dropping his filthy stool on everyone's blog like some diseased mongrel dog?

    I didn't start a blog to give voice to some hate filled, left wing lunatic who only wants to call names and insult. What about that statement is so hard for Mud_Sling to understand?

    You want to duel Mud_Sling? Then duel and stop whining. Pick something to duel with - I prefer pistols at 50 yards but I suspect you prefer insults at 1200 miles.

    ReplyDelete
  30. CS- you and I have no business because you will not permit me to post comments at your blog.


    Tenth- thank you for your answer. What I think we disagree on is the number of people in a sample. Your sample may have been what 20- 30? For an accurate 'reading' of a poll, pollsters use several hundred to thousands.

    Recall from your history book about the 1948 election- Dewey v. Truman? The polling was wrong [as was the Chicago Tribune with the post-election headline, "Dewey Defeats Truman!"]

    http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/DeweyDefeatsTruman

    The reason it was wrong was because the pollsters used telephone polling which, in 1948, was not common in lower class homes. Their sample was skewed and so was their outcome.

    ReplyDelete
  31. C.S--I did volunteer my skills for Habitat for Humanity once. I never new what I would say if I met Carter. Do I dare say to a former President, "My father hated you for what you did to trucking".

    Mud-- You know what I meant. I would not appreciate it if they used your mother to bash you. No more "How's your Mommy" comments, that's all I ask.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Mud_Sling,

    Why do you have to trash my blog? I'm here - let's duel. You have plenty of witnesses. Use your razor sharp wit and logic to tear down my argument.

    Let's Rock N' Roll - or stop whining.

    ReplyDelete
  33. J.O.B.,

    I would have a tough time with Carter. He's a goofy old man now - probably has been senile for a decade now. I wouldn't go out of my way to meet him, but if I stumbled into his path I wouldn't be rude. With that said - I wouldn't avoid telling the truth either.

    I did run into a Democrat (Socialist, Progressive, Liberal, whatever) Congressman of a neighboring District. He thought I was rude to him - all my friends thought it was pretty funny. I think these guys who are serving should hear the truth from us. Carter we should just pity.

    ReplyDelete