Humm, a new direction?

[LouiseVargas]

A's,

Oh my, I want to make a fuss over you!  Good job!!!! Congratulations.

With Love, Louise

[A's Fever]

A's,

Oh my, I want to make a fuss over you!  Good job!!!! Congratulations.

With Love, Louise

I don't think Carnut would want to come to our party!  By the way, it was back in the 1980s, not recently.

[Carnut]

A's,

Oh my, I want to make a fuss over you!  Good job!!!! Congratulations.

With Love, Louise

I don't think Carnut would want to come to our party!  By the way, it was back in the 1980s, not recently.

Heh, heh, doubt very much that party animal and my name have ever been used in the same sentence.

I just hang out in dingy bars and honky tonks dancing with the ladies.

[A's Fever]

Carnut, the Party Animal.  There.  Now you can tell the ladies that you are sometimes called a party animal!

[Carnut]

Louise I explained to you my higher education credentials in this tread awhile back.

http://www.scaredmonkeys.net/viewtopic.php?t=467

[Carnut]

Carnut, the Party Animal.  There.  Now you can tell the ladies that you are sometimes called a party animal!

WooHoo I'm a Party Animal. Thanks.

No one who knows me would believe it, they all the know the cool, reserved, aloof Carnut.

[pdh3]

While I agree that people should be held accountable for their actions, I also believe in the folly of youth. I never experimented with drugs, and I was never a big drinker. But I made other mistakes when I was young, and I learned from them. Some of those lessons were very valuable to me later on in life.
No one is perfect. Personally, I'd rather vote for a man who admits a youthful indescretion, and recognized that it was not a good path to follow. Using drugs was not a great thing to do, and no one is suggesting that it was. Obama certainly isn't. But to me there are worse things......stealing, cheating, assault, rape.........those are the things that are suggestive of terrible personality flaws.
Dubya was not an experimenter. He was a full blown addict who was enabled by his family and money. He still has a hard time being held accountable for his errors, and still won't admit it when he's wrong. IMHO, he learned nothing from his rehabilitation that made him a better man, just a sober one.
Carnut - I also majored in psychology and minored in criminal justice. I strongly believe in the concept of accountablility, and morality.
But I do not believe a mistake by a man as a teenager suggests that he is immoral or has no sense of right and wrong as an adult. He probably has a better idea than someone who has not been tested.
And I'd also like to add that drug abuse is as old as mankind. Human beings have been experimenting with different substances for thousands of years. We have had many great leaders in the past who probably were no stranger to drugs, but the reality of addiction was different in those  earlier cultures. It did not have the same moral and legal ramifications that drug addiction does now, and did not destroy lives on the same scale because it was not recognized as something harmful that needed to be changed. During the Victorian era, laudanum was commonly prescribed by physicians for all kinds of women's ailments. Laudanum, of course was very addictive and contained an opiate that was quite powerful. Generations of women were addicted to it, but no one understood that at the time.

[Carnut]

Fraid I do disagree that Bush was ever addicted to cocaine, I will agree that he was/is an alcoholic.

Seems that it depends on ones politics as to whether one is forgiven for being a drug user.

The dem Barack is ok for using cocaine, just didin't admit in his book that he may have abused the stuff, but he gets a pass by dems.

The GOP Bush is excroriated for having been an alcoholic by dems.

One of the reasons I thought Clinton was unworthy was his disclosure of puffing pot but not inhaling, how disengenous can you get? This before monicagate or even 'the nose' filed suit.

Anyhow, none of them are/were acceptable in my book.

Beginning to think Don Quixote and I have a lot in common.

[LouiseVargas]

Hey George,

I checked out the link and indeed you told me you were a psychologist in the area of emphasis 'Tests and Measures' as well as you have a degree in history in the area of 'Medieval and Ancient' history. Apologies are in order from me to you.

All things considered, after you graduated, did you find a job working  with tests and measures? I imagine a career in accounting, quality control, ect. Or were you one of those guys who designed "personality tests?"

[LouiseVargas]

pdh3,

Standing on a chair and applauding your post.

[Carnut]

Hey George,

I checked out the link and indeed you told me you were a psychologist in the area of emphasis 'Tests and Measures' as well as you have a degree in history in the area of 'Medieval and Ancient' history. Apologies are in order from me to you.

All things considered, after you graduated, did you find a job working  with tests and measures? I imagine a career in accounting, quality control, ect. Or were you one of those guys who designed "personality tests?"

Ah, I managed to get by and retire at 54.

[A's Fever]

While I agree that people should be held accountable for their actions, I also believe in the folly of youth. I never experimented with drugs, and I was never a big drinker. But I made other mistakes when I was young, and I learned from them. Some of those lessons were very valuable to me later on in life.
No one is perfect. Personally, I'd rather vote for a man who admits a youthful indescretion, and recognized that it was not a good path to follow. Using drugs was not a great thing to do, and no one is suggesting that it was. Obama certainly isn't. But to me there are worse things......stealing, cheating, assault, rape.........those are the things that are suggestive of terrible personality flaws.
Dubya was not an experimenter. He was a full blown addict who was enabled by his family and money. He still has a hard time being held accountable for his errors, and still won't admit it when he's wrong. IMHO, he learned nothing from his rehabilitation that made him a better man, just a sober one.
Carnut - I also majored in psychology and minored in criminal justice. I strongly believe in the concept of accountablility, and morality.
But I do not believe a mistake by a man as a teenager suggests that he is immoral or has no sense of right and wrong as an adult. He probably has a better idea than someone who has not been tested.
And I'd also like to add that drug abuse is as old as mankind. Human beings have been experimenting with different substances for thousands of years. We have had many great leaders in the past who probably were no stranger to drugs, but the reality of addiction was different in those  earlier cultures. It did not have the same moral and legal ramifications that drug addiction does now, and did not destroy lives on the same scale because it was not recognized as something harmful that needed to be changed. During the Victorian era, laudanum was commonly prescribed by physicians for all kinds of women's ailments. Laudanum, of course was very addictive and contained an opiate that was quite powerful. Generations of women were addicted to it, but no one understood that at the time.

pdh3, that was an excellent post.  Thank you for your insights.

Carnut's initial observation about Obama's past drug use admission has provided fertile ground for discussion tonight.  I have really enjoyed reading and thinking about the differing points of view. I guess there will be a lot of this type of discussion leading up to the next election.

[Carnut]

While I agree that people should be held accountable for their actions, I also believe in the folly of youth. I never experimented with drugs, and I was never a big drinker. But I made other mistakes when I was young, and I learned from them. Some of those lessons were very valuable to me later on in life.
No one is perfect. Personally, I'd rather vote for a man who admits a youthful indescretion, and recognized that it was not a good path to follow. Using drugs was not a great thing to do, and no one is suggesting that it was. Obama certainly isn't. But to me there are worse things......stealing, cheating, assault, rape.........those are the things that are suggestive of terrible personality flaws.
Dubya was not an experimenter. He was a full blown addict who was enabled by his family and money. He still has a hard time being held accountable for his errors, and still won't admit it when he's wrong. IMHO, he learned nothing from his rehabilitation that made him a better man, just a sober one.
Carnut - I also majored in psychology and minored in criminal justice. I strongly believe in the concept of accountablility, and morality.
But I do not believe a mistake by a man as a teenager suggests that he is immoral or has no sense of right and wrong as an adult. He probably has a better idea than someone who has not been tested.
And I'd also like to add that drug abuse is as old as mankind. Human beings have been experimenting with different substances for thousands of years. We have had many great leaders in the past who probably were no stranger to drugs, but the reality of addiction was different in those  earlier cultures. It did not have the same moral and legal ramifications that drug addiction does now, and did not destroy lives on the same scale because it was not recognized as something harmful that needed to be changed. During the Victorian era, laudanum was commonly prescribed by physicians for all kinds of women's ailments. Laudanum, of course was very addictive and contained an opiate that was quite powerful. Generations of women were addicted to it, but no one understood that at the time.

pdh3, that was an excellent post.  Thank you for your insights.

Carnut's initial observation about Obama's past drug use admission has provided fertile ground for discussion tonight.  I have really enjoyed reading and thinking about the differing points of view. I guess there will be a lot of this type of discussion leading up to the next election.

Yeah, but I'm the only one on the opposing side, I don't even vote anymore.

[pdh3]

Carnut........voter apathy is a problem, especially in a democracy like ours. Think about it.
When I was 18, I was a mediocre student and had no plans for my future. On my first trip to college, I flunked out, came home and worked for a while. As I matured, I learned from that mistake. I went back to college and was a Dean's List student. I was a BETTER person for having failed at something. I was able to use that lapse in judgement made as a teenager in a positive way.
We learn wisdom as we age. I am not the same person I was at 18. Few people are.
Whether it's experimenting with drugs, or any other youthful indescretion, a person of strength and character will admit they made an error and move forward.
As much as I liked Bill Clinton, and thought he did a great job as President, one thing about him bothered me. For all his charisma and charm, Bill lacked self-confience. This is why he couldn't admit his pot-smoking, and why he was an unfaithful husband. He sought approval in inappropriate ways, and it was his undoing.
Every President has at least one major flaw, because every President is human. We need to stop expecting perfection, because no one can deliver it. What we need is someone who recognizes their weaknesses, and can appoint others to fill the void. This is what Ronald Reagan did so effectively.

[Carnut]

Carnut........voter apathy is a problem, especially in a democracy like ours. Think about it.
When I was 18, I was a mediocre student and had no plans for my future. On my first trip to college, I flunked out, came home and worked for a while. As I matured, I learned from that mistake. I went back to college and was a Dean's List student. I was a BETTER person for having failed at something. I was able to use that lapse in judgement made as a teenager in a positive way.
We learn wisdom as we age. I am not the same person I was at 18. Few people are.
Whether it's experimenting with drugs, or any other youthful indescretion, a person of strength and character will admit they made an error and move forward.
As much as I liked Bill Clinton, and thought he did a great job as President, one thing about him bothered me. For all his charisma and charm, Bill lacked self-confience. This is why he couldn't admit his pot-smoking, and why he was an unfaithful husband. He sought approval in inappropriate ways, and it was his undoing.
Every President has at least one major flaw, because every President is human. We need to stop expecting perfection, because no one can deliver it. What we need is someone who recognizes their weaknesses, and can appoint others to fill the void. This is what Ronald Reagan did so effectively.

Yeah, Reagan was the last Pres that I actually voted for.

Soon afterwards I saw that neither major political party voiced much that I could agree with and all I had left was chosing between two evils and personalities.

I have always been one who seemed to vote 'against', rather than 'for' most political office choices.

Then I saw that the only political party anywhere near my values was the Libertarian party and that they had no chance of ever winning any offices and at the worst they were just spoilers and generally they 'spoiled' the one candidate that I leaned more toward than against.

So I now choose to not vote, I really do think it is a waste of time on my part. And I honestly believe that all elections should be 'lotteries' kinda like picking for jury duty. Really doubt very much such elections would produce any worse results that the current methods.

So I consider myself more of a political Anarchist than anything else.

[pdh3]

The Libertarian Party has some good philosophies. It just needs young people and lots of money to move to the forefront. It needs energizing and publicity, and then the money would flow into it's bank account. It would be nice to have another viable party candidate from which to choose.
Did you know that John Stossel is a Libertarian?

[Carnut]

The Libertarian Party has some good philosophies. It just needs young people and lots of money to move to the forefront. It needs energizing and publicity, and then the money would flow into it's bank account. It would be nice to have another viable party candidate from which to choose.
Did you know that John Stossel is a Libertarian?

Yes, I know John Stossel is a Libertarian.

Fraid I disagree with the term 'voter apathy'.  I think not voting is a choice and not just 'apathy'. Why vote when the choice is between two equally evil or unacceptable candidates?

Again I can see where assisting in campaigning can be of some use if there is any chance for someone to get elected, but with two highly opposing parties with candidates chosen by being acceptable to the extremes of the opposing parties, there seems to be little or no rationale for voting for one extreme or the other.

I still think that a lottery is the way to pick public servants. Don't really think that could be any worse than the election choices I have seen in the last 20yrs. or so.

[pdh3]

Wow carnut....you are very rigid in your interpretations. I see voter apathy as those who do not vote because they do not like any candidates, or don't care to get involved in the process for whatever reasons. There are always amendments to vote on, as well as local elections, but some people just aren't interested in politics at any level. There are many people too lazy to make the effort. When people are not engaged in doing their civic duty, I see it as apathy.
Changes are made when people get involved and decide to get something done to make things better. Hopelessness does not make any situation better. It's a guarantee of the status quo.

[Carnut]

Wow carnut....you are very rigid in your interpretations. I see voter apathy as those who do not vote because they do not like any candidates, or don't care to get involved in the process for whatever reasons. There are always amendments to vote on, as well as local elections, but some people just aren't interested in politics at any level. There are many people too lazy to make the effort. When people are not engaged in doing their civic duty, I see it as apathy.
Changes are made when people get involved and decide to get something done to make things better. Hopelessness does not make any situation better. It's a guarantee of the status quo.

Ok, when I see any election issue or office with a tie vote, I'll kick myself for not voting.

[Carnut]

Changes are made when people get involved and decide to get something done to make things better. Hopelessness does not make any situation better. It's a guarantee of the status quo.

I totally agree with this statement, I just don't think it has much to do with an individual voting.