[Jeff Fortson]

money, in excess, rots the artistic mind.

[JakaB]

in this once great and now pathetic nation known as the USA

Knowing that you hate your country makes me feel better about the courses you hate.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Lou,
You remind me of the guy who went to the village well, pumped out all of the drinking water into a tank and then hid quickly hid it. When the village desperately needed water to survive, you exclaimed to all, "Don't look at me! I don't have any!" Then shortly after when village died of thirst and they found you as the only survivor, you quietly murmur, "I don't know, what happened?"

Some guys to feel sorry for because they pay too much taxes: (I stopped at $20,000,000 and under)
 Steven Jobs
Apple Computer   $89,887,282.00
 Craig A. Conway
PeopleSoft Inc.   $84,872,447.00
 L. Kozlowski
Tyco International   $81,149,712.00
 Michael S. Jeffries
Abercrombie & Fitch Co.   $66,733,818.00
 John B. Blystone
SPX Corp.   $62,615,404.00
 Milan Panic
ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc.   $60,757,767.00
 John Chambers
Cisco Systems   $58,098,968.00
 Frederic Poses
American Standard   $50,391,797.00
 P. Stokes
Anheuser-Busch   $47,077,895.00
 Robert L. Nardelli
Home Depot   $42,179,827.00
 Alfred Lerner
MBNA Corp.   $37,904,573.00
 Miles White
Abbott Labs   $37,143,127.00
 John Gifford
Maxim Integrated Prod   $35,428,794.00
 Henry McKinnell
Pfizer, Inc.   $33,912,294.00
Richard Kovacevich
Wells Fargo   $33,563,741.00
 Robert Walter
Cardinal Health, Inc.   $33,305,208.00
 William W. McGuire, M
United Health Group Inc.   $33,140,657.00
 Ivan Seidenberg
Verizon Communications   $32,559,700.00
 Ray Irani
Occidental Petroleum   $32,521,692.00
 Corbin McNeill
Exelon Corp.   $32,502,581.00
 Jeffrey Barbakow
Tenet Healthcare Corp.   $31,992,980.00
 G. Sullivan
Clorox Co.   $31,831,525.00
 D. D'Alessandro
John Hancock Financial   $30,369,656.00
 James Cayne
Bear Stearns Cos.   $29,818,600.00
 Steven Reinemund
PepsiCo Inc.   $28,997,017.00
 Albert L. Lord
SLM Corporation   $28,152,200.00
 Kerry Killinger
Washington Mutual   $27,894,513.00
 Derek Smith
ChoicePoint Inc.   $27,337,505.00
 Mr. Dreier
Ryland Group   $26,045,929.00
 Jerome Tatar
MeadWestvaco Corporation   $25,928,251.00
 Terry S. Semel
Yahoo Inc.   $25,878,711.00
 L. R. Raymond
Exxon Mobil Corp.   $25,831,849.00
 Vance Coffman
Lockheed Martin Corp.   $25,497,434.00
 Daniel Amos
AFLAC Corporation   $25,121,403.00
 Scott McNealy
Sun Microsystems   $24,815,374.00
 Jerald Fishman
Analog Devices   $24,661,473.00
 Jeffrey W. Greenberg
Marsh & McLennan   $24,466,965.00
 J. J. Mulva
ConocoPhillips   $24,450,558.00
 Richard Kogan
Schering-Plough   $24,445,755.00
 S. Sanger
General Mills   $24,443,875.00
 John Stafford
Wyeth   $23,701,109.00
 Barry S. Sternlicht
Starwood Hotels & Resorts   $23,123,220.00
 Brian Halla
National Semiconductor   $23,086,087.00
 Jeffrey Immelt
General Electric   $22,918,357.00
 Raymond Gilmartin
Merck & Co.   $22,535,235.00
 Eugene M. Isenberg
Nabors Industries Ltd.   $22,246,442.00
 Henry T. Nicholas, II
Broadcom Corporation   $22,146,787.00
 R. Zarrella
Bausch & Lomb   $21,963,636.00
 John Thompson
Symantec Corp.   $21,931,288.00
 William Clay Ford
Ford Motor   $21,839,952.00
 H. Scott
Wal-Mart Stores   $21,740,052.00
 Peter Karmanos
Compuware Corp.   $21,412,364.00
 Kenneth D. Lewis
Bank of America Corp.   $21,068,119.00
 K. Chenault
American Express   $20,870,154.00
 Alan B. Miller
Univl Health Svs   $20,816,343.00
 M. R. Greenberg
American Int'l. Group   $20,542,250.00
 Dan M. Palmer
Concord EFS Inc.   $20,175,550.00

[Jeff Fortson]

 

What are they going to do without all that money?

I saw Steve Jobs at a soup kitchen last week.  He must really be hurting.

Jeff F.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Lets take $20,000,000.00, (so I'm not neccessarily picking on any poor CEO who pays too much in taxes) and divide it by the AVERAGE Median Household Income in the United States which would be $43,057.00 = 464 1/2 employees wages.

Lou, Thats a lot of stupid people out there isn't it? Or better yet, it's the near equivilant of CEO's in America that are making over $10,000,000.00 a year annually!

Lou,

Median Household Income (In 2002 Inflation-adjusted Dollars)
Households (State level)
 
Rank State     Median Lower Bound Upper Bound
   United States  43,057  42,836  43,278  
1  New Jersey  58,759  57,332  60,186  
2  Connecticut  56,543  54,850  58,236  
3  Alaska  56,536  54,429  58,643  
4  Maryland  55,650  54,124  57,176  
5  Massachusetts  55,266  54,076  56,456  
6  New Hampshire  54,225  52,324  56,126  
7  Hawaii  50,565  47,859  53,271  
8  Delaware  50,025  48,712  51,338  
9  California  49,738  49,147  50,329  
10  Minnesota  49,352  47,844  50,860  
11  Virginia  48,986  47,570  50,402  
12  Colorado  48,282  45,601  50,963  
13  Illinois  46,528  45,291  47,766  
14  Utah  46,443  45,034  47,852  
15  Washington  46,041  44,403  47,679  
16  Rhode Island  45,634  44,352  46,916  
17  New York  44,923  44,136  45,710  
18  Nevada  43,928  42,002  45,854  
19  Vermont  43,914  42,482  45,346  
20  Michigan  43,795  42,879  44,711  
21  District of Columbia  43,681  41,158  46,204  
22  Wisconsin  43,617  42,238  44,996  
23  Georgia  42,069  41,459  42,680  
24  Indiana  41,906  41,411  42,401  
25  Texas  41,376  40,909  41,843  
26  Arizona  41,172  40,415  41,929  
27  Pennsylvania  41,171  40,633  41,709  
28  Wyoming  41,099  39,398  42,800  
29  Ohio  40,697  39,884  41,510  
30  Oregon  40,378  39,081  41,675  
31  Missouri  40,198  39,497  40,899  
32  Kansas  40,051  39,026  41,076  
33  Maine  39,990  38,979  41,001  
34  Nebraska  39,904  39,048  40,760  
35  Iowa  39,288  37,514  41,062  
36  Florida  39,265  38,445  40,085  
37  North Carolina  38,204  36,533  39,875  
38  South Carolina  37,936  36,057  39,815  
39  Tennessee  37,281  36,539  38,024  
40  Idaho  37,261  35,194  39,328  
41  South Dakota  37,252  35,548  38,956  
42  North Dakota  36,237  35,000  37,475  
43  New Mexico  36,019  34,306  37,732  
44  Oklahoma  35,568  34,776  36,360  
45  Alabama  35,412  34,762  36,062  
46  Montana  35,257  33,934  36,580  
47  Kentucky  34,973  33,201  36,745  
48  Arkansas  34,402  33,282  35,522  
49  Louisiana  33,311  32,031  34,591  
50  Mississippi  31,690  30,682  32,698  
51  West Virginia  30,982  29,741  32,223  

Now lets see the average home price per state:

 Median Value (In 2002 Inflation-adjusted Dollars)
Specified Owner-occupied Housing Units (State Level)
 
 Rank State Median Lower Bound Upper Bound
   United States  136,929  136,261  137,597  
1  Hawaii  291,576  243,757  339,395  
2  California  275,526  271,728  279,324  
3  Massachusetts  249,161  245,912  252,410  
4  District of Columbia  212,428  200,873  223,983  
5  New Jersey  210,483  207,325  213,641  
6  Colorado  199,039  188,680  209,398  
7  Connecticut  196,143  192,170  200,116  
8  Washington  189,148  185,190  193,106  
9  New York  176,438  172,523  180,353  
10  New Hampshire  173,699  170,490  176,908  
11  Maryland  165,784  162,771  168,797  
12  Rhode Island  165,458  162,661  168,255  
13  Alaska  162,526  159,521  165,531  
14  Oregon  160,185  156,106  164,264  
15  Nevada  157,407  151,949  162,865  
16  Minnesota  155,212  151,752  158,672  
17  Utah  151,775  148,496  155,054  
18  Illinois  147,353  144,513  150,193  
19  Virginia  145,437  142,837  148,037  
20  Delaware  145,004  142,722  147,286  
21  Arizona  136,434  134,347  138,521  
22  Michigan  133,270  128,648  137,892  
23  Georgia  131,221  129,205  133,237  
24  Vermont  130,492  127,481  133,503  
25  Florida  128,120  124,995  131,245  
26  Wisconsin  122,259  118,395  126,123  
27  North Carolina  121,181  117,304  125,059  
28  Maine  121,036  117,723  124,349  
29  South Carolina  116,614  112,085  121,143  
30  New Mexico  116,080  107,337  124,823  
31  Idaho  115,744  111,837  119,651  
32  Ohio  113,072  109,919  116,225  
33  Wyoming  110,586  97,747  123,425  
34  Montana  106,735  97,757  115,713  
35  Tennessee  106,070  103,631  108,509  
36  Pennsylvania  102,871  101,610  104,132  
37  Missouri  102,252  98,629  105,875  
38  Indiana  100,762  96,807  104,717  
39  Kentucky  98,132  96,568  99,696  
40  Louisiana  94,786  91,074  98,499  
41  Texas  94,559  93,445  95,673  
42  Nebraska  94,191  91,198  97,184  
43  Kansas  94,005  89,750  98,260  
44  Alabama  93,917  90,889  96,945  
45  South Dakota  90,022  85,557  94,487  
46  Iowa  88,176  84,752  91,600  
47  West Virginia  81,695  77,855  85,535  
48  North Dakota  80,317  78,010  82,624  
49  Oklahoma  79,839  78,154  81,524  
50  Mississippi  79,425  75,515  83,336  
51  Arkansas  79,043  77,447  80,639  

So, if you were looking at any of these mammoth salaries, compared it to the poor shmoe that is working his ass off everyday to feed his family, let alone pay for a suitable and safe home which he can raise his family in a proper way(Like many here on GCA) This doesn't seem all that attainable for the average bloak. Yet, I would like to know how many extra houses that H. Scott of Walmart Stores might own that aren't his normal residence, in vacation spots throughout the country, if not the world.

The point of all of this Lou is to keep it in line with Golf Architecture, and I'm going to accomplish that:

Read Robert Hunter's "Poverty" Yes, the same Robert Hunter that built Monterey Peninsula CC and Cypress Point Club and see what he thought of the subject of poverty or not allowing the masses to live THEIR lives by choking them to death in every aspect of their hard earned wage, which every ounce of it goes to raising their families, let alone living in a house that can provides them warmth, comfort, security.

And then they have to pay their electric bill.

[Tommy_Naccarato]

I forgot to add, If all of us do good at making money, wouldn't that mean that the CEO is doing good also?

If all of us are doing bad, and the CEO is still doing good, then there is something wrong. Usually this means an unstable economy, which only affects the CEO financially if they terminate his contract and his Golden Parachute for doing so is half of his yearly salary. Then, I can only hope he knows how to get by. (Choke, choke!)(Sorry, I was clearing out my throat.)

[DMoriarty]

So, who is more stupider...a fan of Rush or a fan of Fazio.   Either way you are going to have a bunch of people smarter than you showing you the light.

I dont get you on this topic Barney . . . You are like the class bully . . . always pushing and picking fights . . . when someone finally pops you one back you claim that everyone is picking on you . . . .

[JohnV]

By the way, Rush Limbaugh got his start in radio as a rock-and-roll DJ in Pittsburgh.  He had to move to California to turn into the nut he is today.

A great quote of his from an interview in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (yes I know Lou it is a liberal paper, but we do have balance here with John Mellon Sciaffe's Tribune Review)
"The reason [guests weren't included on his radio show] was not ego.  I wanted to find out if I could be the reason people listened to radio."  No, not ego.

I guess calling people "femi-Nazis" is not as bad as calling them "little Hitlers" in your book, but it seems the pretty much the same to me.  Or perhaps it is the "little" that bothers you.

One day I listened to Rush this year, he kept playing the same tape of Ted Kennedy where he misspoke about getting Clinton re-elected over and over that was made in 1998 (or maybe even earlier) because he thought it was funny.  What a waste of air time.

The funny thing is I heard him being interviewed on Tim Russert's show on CNBC and he was much calmer and less inflamatory.  He tried to use reasoned arguments and make his points.  Perhaps if he did that more frequently I might have a little more respect for him.   But, he started this entire scream and shout political radio genre and now he whines when people attack him for his statements.

As for Clinton and his advances to women, I don't like them either and Paula Jones had a right to sue him.  But the witch hunt by the special prosecutor was a sad joke.  Starr should have been severely reprimanded for the leaks of grand jury testimony that he allowed/blessed.  I was very disappointed with many of the liberal organizations such as NOW that continued to defend Clinton when he obviously was doing things that they had fought against for year.  Just as I'm disappointed by the conservatives who are willing to give Bush and the administration a blanket break for possibly lieing to the American people about WMDs just because he is one of them.

There are very few men or women of character in politics today on either side.

[MargaretC]

JohnV-

I've been listening somewhat irregularly to Rush for years, and with the exception of his occasional parodies, I find that most of his commentary deal with issues.  I have certainly not heard him attacking his political foes with anything close to the same invective tone that is often directed at him and the so-called "radical right".  He is a showman and entertainer, and his comments in jest about the "femme-Nazis" and Enviromental Whackos" are rather tame when compared to the serious characterizations by the Left that conservatives are a bunch of mean little Hitlers who want to starve the children, poison the air, and kill-off the senior citizens...

...By contrast, Clinton was sued and he lied under oath to deny his victim to opportunity to prevail in court...There is very good evidence that Clinton has forced himself on numerous women, but because he comes across as a champion of women's issues he gets a free pass from the Left...the Clintons and their supporters from the Viet Nam war era are the creators of the politics of personal destruction.  That we are polarized so much as a nation is largely a product of this rudderless group.

In as far as situational ethics, the conservatives have a much better record of being accountable when they are wrong.  Nixon would not have resigned if the Republicans had adopted the Democrat Party's circle the wagons approach to save Clinton.  His own Republican allies forced him out.  Bob Packwood, a Republican by name only, was booted out for kissing and otherwise putting the moves on on women on his staff.  Both Republican leaders of the House and Senate resigned, one for an extra-marital infidelity that was reported by Democrat Larry Flynt, the other because he said some nice things about a retiring Senate colleague.  Conservatives are people and people make mistakes.  For the most part, we own up to it and take our punishment like grown-ups.

Like Limbaugh who reportedly makes $30MM per year and has over 20 MM listeners, not too shabby for a crackpot, Fazio is probably the most in demand person in his business.  Despite MM$+ fees, he has the opportunity to do more work than nearly anyone else.  Why?  Because his clients, primarily rich people, are a bunch of idiots who know nothing about golf?  Please!!!!  These are the many of the same folks in the top 1% of the population who we are trying to tax out of existence.  They are not the people who need help with confusing punch cards and hanging chads.  And why should we cut them some slack?  After all, they got more than what they need.  From a purely selfish standpoint, simply because if it weren't for them we would be much more like our European friends.  For the most part, they pay the bills, create the jobs, and take the risk.  But rather than hold them up as examples, we call them selfish, greedy, mean-spirited, "winners of life's lottery", right-wing, corporate thiefs, "the establishment", and any other negative name we can create.  For shame.

Lou:

It ALL boils down to, "in the eye of the beholder."

Dye-hard partisans from ANY political group regularly demonstrate an inability to see "warts" within their own group, but very quick to point out the "warts" in other groups.

With all due respect, neither Clinton nor his followers created the politics of personal destruction.    That form of low-life, non-issue-based gutter politics has been around, in varying degrees, FOREVER.  IMHO, politics of personal destruction has pathetically become almost an artform and is used by Dye-hard Partisans from EVERY political group.  In the last 20 years or so, it may appear to have increased; however, I think that is more of a factor of improved communications via the "information age."

Please understand that I am NOT "picking" on you for a lack of a better descriptive.  I respect your views and your right to express them.

What you consider "performance and entertainment" by Limbaugh is pompous and obnoxious to me.  I also feel the same way about Terry McCallife(sp?).  I could add a host of other Rep, Dem, Green dye-hard partisans to that list.  

Quite frankly, I am wary of most, if not all, dye-hard partisans.  I have NEVER voted a straight party ticket for ANY political party in ANY election.

If dye-hard partisans were truly able to accurately "keep score" in terms of "situational ethics," my gut tells me that the Reps and Dems "scores" would virtually be the same.  From MY perspective most, if not all, dye-hard partisans see the world as black/white -- i.e., Reps = good/Dems = bad and vice versa.  

[eg: Will Ted Kennedy's long ago indiscretions ever stop becoming news items?  Gary Hart?  How long is W's military record going to be discussed?  His previous drinking problem and DUI?  Al Gore's military record?  Al Gore and the Internet?  Al Gore and Naomi whats-her-name?  I could go on and on...   ]

IMO, few issues, etc. are black/white.  Our government, IMO, would be more effective and truly serve, "We the People" if political parties engaged in a collaborative problem solving process as opposed to the partisan gridlock that accomplishes nothing.  A prime reason that the "core problems" associated with social security have YET to be effectively addressed by ANY Congress even though Social Security Problems have been a MAJOR THEME in EVERY national election over the last 20 years!

Hells bells!  No politician wants to be forced to make a MAJOR decision that will impact Social Security -- TOO RISKY!  ALL politicians consider that loose/loose.

The increasing pathological division among political parties  created by dye-hard partisans is the primary reason that the percentage of eligible voters who actually vote in any election continues to drop like a rock.  The average moderate eligible voter is turned-off by the Limbaughs, so-called religious right folks, and other far right groups as well as the Terry McCalliffe's (sp?), Paul Begala, Al Sharpton, etc., and other far left folks and the lesser known partisans from the other political parties.

Sorry, Lou, guess I got a little cranked up on this topic.  

I should have stopped at, "it's in the eye of the beholder."  That's what it all boils down to...sadly, situational ethics is alive and well in American society.  Kids in school have learned to parse our language as if they had attorneys on retainer out in the school yard.  That may sound funny; however, as a parent of six children, I think it is pathetic.  

AMEN!

Sorry, Lou...  

[Tim_Weiman]

JohnV:

Wow. This thread is all over the place. Not my favorite thing as I believe it dilutes our golf architecture discussion. But, I do want to comment on your suggestion that Bush "possibly lied" about WMD in Iraq.

I don't believe he did. Prior to the war, there was basically a concensus among intelligence agencies about Iraq and WMD:

a) Iraq has possessed and used biological and chemical weapons in the past

b) Iraq has the capability to produce biological and chemical weapons

c) Iraq has not accounted for inventories of biological and chemical weapons known to have existed

d) Iraq may have moved to a "minimum inventory" strategy to avoid detection and hasten the day when UN sanctions would be removed

e) Iraq has demonstrated a nuclear capability in the past

f) Iraq claimed for a long time this was for civilian energy production purposes only

g) UN inspectioners went years without being able to prove otherwise

h) It took information from Iraqi defectors, members of Saddam's family to really penetrate what was going on and confirm Iraq was working to develop nuclear weapons

i) Estimates of how long it would take for Iraq to acquire this capability varied. The optimistic forecasts projected 6-7 years; pessemistic assessments suggested Iraq may be only couple years away

j) There were doubts that Saddam ever intended to use biological or chemical weapons against US military strategy. This was based on two factors: the US military was well equipped to deal was such an attack and using such weapons would likely only extend UN sanctions

k) All along the perceived danger of WMD (in any form) was against civilian populations; indeed, that remains the threat today

l) The most significant speech that Bush gave on the subject of Iraq and WMD was last fall at the United Nations where he carefully evoked the words of Winston Churchill describing Iraq not as an "imminent threat" but a "grave and gathering danger".

m) Bush didn't just evoke the words of Churchill: he came to essentially the same conclusion President Clinton did about Saddam that sooner or later we would have to confront him.
In sum, neither President thought the danger was "imminent"; both felt it was real, would grow stronger over time and reach the point of being unacceptable to American naional security interests.

Nothing that has happened since going to war conflicts with the pre war intelligence assessment. Many people seem to want 1960s Cuba missile like photographic evidence. Our adversaries know better than that.

Finally, have you noticed how many people are now preoccupied with the question of whether we should have gone to war when that decision is behind us and the important task of "winning the peace" lies ahead? Is it in America's interest to fail at the challenge before us? Are there no dangers associated with allowing Iraq to become one big Samolia?

[Jeff Fortson]

The snozberries taste like snozberries.

[HamiltonBHearst]

margaret- as usual you are a voice of reason however I do have some minor quibbles.

When you speak about long-ago indiscretions they all should be judged in context except for Mr. Kennedy's incident which should never be forgotton.  Also, Naomi Wolf is not long Ago but rather an effort by a friend of Mr. Gore's daughter to get him to act more like a alpha male.  This was part of his act for this campaign and is certainly not in the past.  Seems like this was the reason he approached Bush in the debate and got in his personal space.

Also. Limbaugh is an entertainer.  His views and statements should be no more bothersome to the left than when Clooney, and Sean Penn and jessica Lange speak.  No.  

you are also comparing Rush an entertainer and religous right(whoever that is) to Begala(who worked for the president at a minimum, Mcaulliffe who is chair of the dnc, and Sharpton who is a candidate for the democratic presidential nomination.

You are comparing supporters of the republicans with actual candidates and policy makers of the dems.


I will close by stating in Rush like fashion.I believe  Rev. Sharpton has gotton a free pass from the media for his past actions because he is black.

[Lou_Duran]

Damn, I spent about a half an hour typing this morning and inadvertantly hit ESC wiping it out.  It was probably BS anyways.

Here is a brief reply.

Tommy- While you are doing lists, sort one by highest taxed states and show jobs added/lost in the last ten years by each one.  Go one step further, and sort one by highest to lowest cost of living index.  Do you think that it is by chance that NY and CA do not fare well and people keep moving here to Texas?   Believe me, I would rather be with the beautiful people than here in Arlington.  Also, as Hunter aged, his politics changed.  It is my understanding that he died a staunch, unabashed conservative.  BTW, why did you leave out some of your well-heeled Hollywood brothers and sisters?  I am sure that some are in the $50 to $100 MM/year range.  Of course, they are excepted from the stupid definition.

MargaretC-  I like the way you connected this thread to gca.  I am not sure that Pete Dye would appreciate it.  Of course, everything is about perspective.  And the way the language has been diluted, a fact is not a fact until all parties stipulate that it is so.  I don't need to defend Rush, Fazio, or the top 1%.  They do quite well without me.  It does irk me that some of my gca friends seem to consume so much of the garbage that is being fed by the arrogant "if you don't agree with me you are stupid or evil" Left.  I am aware that political discourse was very polarized from the inception of this country,  However, there appeared to be a short period following WWII to the Nixon administration when things were more civil.  Beginning with Nixon ("we are all Keynsians now") who did try to get along until his detractors went head hunting (I believe that Hillary as a young attorney on the Dems staff opined that Nixon did not even have a right to his own counsel on the Watergate matter), the whole political landscape has gone south.  And in my time watching politics, no one was worse than the Clintons.  This is my perspective, and I can live with others thinking diametrically otherwise.

JohnV- Rush can do without you.  President Bush and Senator Hutchinson are two politicians whom I consider to be very honorable.  I concur with Tim's response to the WMD point you raised.   As with GCA, I would prefer more information as to the merits or problems with programs and policies and not so much personal invective.  I no more believe that Bush is trying to line the pockets of the corporate wealthy than I do that Fazio is trying to erase the vestiges of the Classical era.  Could it be that they do what they think is best for their clients?  And as a citizen, I do consider myself to be one of President Bush's many clients.  Yes, he disappoints me in some things- he has other clients to represent as well- and in others he does extremely well.  Most things are not about a utopian perfection, but a balaning of positives and negatives.  From my standpoint, both do a very good job overall.  As does Mr. Limbaugh.

And now to more golf....

Is Tiger on his way to another "Player of the Year" title?  

[JakaB]

When in grade school did any of us have a crush on a girl or boy who may have not been pretty enough or popular enough for the "in" group.  Do any of us regret how we didn't go on to discover what that person may have brought to the table because of our fear of also not being "in".   Who pretends to be "in" today...is it the poor..are they the undereducated...is it rural america....the Rush haters or Fazio bashers...the "party line"...miss what you wish and kill at will because the ugly and stupid and smelly and poor have never been any good anyway...just ask the people who put them there.

[Tim_Weiman]

Redanman:

Disagreement prior to the war was over matters of policy not intelligence assessments. Even the French acknowledge that and they're hardly supporters of the Bush Administration. Moreover, Kofi Annan - no Bush fan either - recently reminded all UN members that WMD and people who would use them against civilian populations do in fact exist. That reality gets lost amidst all the Bush bashing and suggestions of "lying". Indeed, Annan made clear multinational efforts against this threat will be required well into the future. Annan's comments were a sober reflection of reality, not some "agenda driven drivel" as you suggest.

By the way, are you familiar with the writing of Frenchman Jean Francois Revel?

[Jeff Fortson]

JakaB,

In real life, Tri-Lams don't win Greek Society contests.

Jeff F.

[DMoriarty]

Geez Barney, taking it out on us because you were too cowardly to stand against your friends back in high school?  Her name wasnt Victoria, was it?

Not sure that even taste in golf course architecture is as subjective as taste in women.   But anyone who longs for the approval of his peer group in choosing either one usually gets what what they deserve.  

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Lou, Trust me, I didn't wantto leave them out, but at the time, I got tired of posting all of the information. PLUS--Lou, make no mistake. I'm far from being liberal, way far. I would rather place myself in a more human category then the liberal or conservative extremists that I abhor, and where I can form my own opinions not from just what I read or what I hear in the media, but also from those whose opinions I have some to know, trust and respect.  I listen to you, David M, Tom Paul, Rcih and others, and then decide for myself on the moral and ethical grounds that hopefully form my character and integrity.  

You wanna buy a watch? ? ?

[George Pazin]

The only people I can really trust are Bill Coore, Geoff Shackelford and TommyN.

I personally am very hurt by this coment.

Tommy -

You really need to read & think about some economics books. Try Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell. The sole differences between us & the rest of the world (regardless of what redanman tries to sell us ) is the we were founded based upon a capitalist system that is the only true expression of fredom & liberty, & we have laws that apply equally to everyone. Many have tried to undermine both (indeed, both conservatives & liberals, as called by the media, have failed in this regard) and the closer we get to adhering to these founding principles of freedom & liberty, the better off we will ALL be.

-----
I'm kind of amazed that anyone is still pursuing the WMD charge.

Everyone was in agreement prior to this war that Iraq had them. Everyone. Clinton. The UN. Clinton bombed Iraq based on this info. Clinton, who has no greater critic than yours truly, was right to bomb Iraq, he should've done more.

Hussein was an EVIL EVIL man who tortured & terrorized hundreds of thousands of his own people. They have found Al Quaida camps in Iraq. They found a terrorist, Abu Nidal, who f-ing shot & killed a handicapped man on a cruiseliner. They have uncovered roving bio labs. Do you think these were clinics to help the people? They have found prison camps that held CHILDREN of "enemies" of the state.

You guys are criticising Bush for taking action? You should be ashamed of yourselves. ASHAMED. Take a long hard look in the mirror the next time you think what we did was wrong.

I have no problem crediting someone whom I detest for doing something right. IMO, Clinton represents everything wrong with the world today, yet I commend him for getting NAFTA passed. I commend him for taking action against a Serbian monster who wasn't 1/10th the threat or evil person that Hussein was (Milosevic). Hell, if he had done it intentionally, I'd credit him with creating such a huge distraction in his second term that the rest of the country was able to get on with its business & flourish while a bunch of bozos in DC wasted time & energy pursuing an unattainable goal.

Get a grip. The war between the terrorists & the rest of the world has been growing & escalating for years. Don't let your petty personal politics affect your evaluation of what GW is doing. I was not a big fan of his prior to the election, but he has done a decent job with an unbelievably terrible position.

The only thing that will save the world is the institution of democracy & freedom in the rest of the world. PERIOD. You can bullshit all you want about multiculturalism & such crap that the intellectual geniuses wish to push on everyone, but until we have governments that respect human rights, we will never have peace in the world. How we accomplish this is up to debate, but it will never be accomplished by coddling or ignoring situations like Iraq. Or Cuba. Or Afghanistan. Or the Sudan. Hell, much of Africa & virtually all of the Middle East. The only country in the Middle East that seems to get criticised is Israel, the only democracy in the region, and one that allows Arabs to vote, which no other Arab country does!

-----

Did anyone else follow football for the last twenty years & not know that Tommy Kramer was black?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

George,
Very well said, and I agree with you my good freind! (Yuck!!!! I'm trying to sound like Tom Huckaby!) (G. Sullivan-Clorox Co. $31,831,525.00)

Actually all kidding aside, George, I have not one iota of a problem with capatilism and the ability of those to earn a dollar. In fact, I totally agree with you, just as China does, because they are quickly becoming something I'm not quite sure of--communism and capatilism in the same sentence? I don't know enough there to be able to comment, so I'll stand down.

However, I tend to side with the Steve Jobs' of the world that do things for the betterment of, or future of our youth. If he earns, what was it, $86,000,000.00 a year and literally gives away computer equimpment to schools, that's telling me something. However, I find fault when the typical Joe who is going to work, and has to drive daily +/-40 miles to do it at $2.10 a gallon, (Ray Irani-Occidental Petroleum $32,521,692.00 ) doesn't get to see his kids at night. The only thing he can do when he does get home is sit down and have a BUD (P. Stokes-Anheuser-Busch $47,077,895.00) I need a Rolaid! (Henry McKinnell-Pfizer, Inc. $33,912,294.00_

We can go on and on about politics, and I'll be the first one to surrender complete incomptence on most subjects. Yes, they were sitting in the back of trucks formulating bio-warfare, but that's what we are being fed by a press that is controlled simply by the same captilistic machine that is feeding them the stories that sell. After all, that is what's most important in business and captalism correct? That they are reading the product or viewing it?  

And wasn't it the wise man who once said, "Don't believe everything you read or hear." Well, I will be the first to admit fault there, I do that a lot.

Ultimately George, I think I tend to look at other issues here that affect me, loved ones, friends and others most--the war at home, TAXES, CAR REGISTRATIONS, HEALTHCARE, you name it! If Capatilism is to work, and we go by the mantra of commercialism, then I think we have to stop importing everything. Create some more jobs at home. How else do we keep our economy going further and further, by giving it all away to foreign powers that can do it cheaper? Wouldn't providing the spark for computers made in the USA; electrical parts made in the USA or shirts silk-screened in the USA make a difference in National economic health and growth? Or is it better to rely on someone that is making their orange widgets at rock bottom prices, by pigmy chidlren in barefeet; and then marking it up at untold percentages because its costs earned thereby eliminating the jobs that 5.61 % Americans don't have? (The national average of American's out of work as in today's paper. There I go again, believing everything I read and then quoting it on this website!)

[TEPaul]

Uh, Barney, regarding that post #177 it seems maybe you have a few residual "issues" that might need to be worked out that may not have much to do with what others think of Tom Fazio or his golf architecture.

[Lou_Duran]

Over a few beers after golf yesterday, an editor from one of Texas's leading newspaper confirmed that there is a large concensus among his sports writers that Rush is full of it on the McNabb issue, and that the subject matter is out of line.  Having said this, this fellow doesn't believe that there is an underlying "liberal bias" in the media today.

On CBS this morning, a happy, very animated black commentator took Rush to task for saying "things against" McNabb.  She then went on to mention Hitler (do all liberals in the media and at large receive talking points to argue with?) and how well he would do in talk radio today.  She showed muted snippets of Rush speaking in several forums while reporting that among other insensitive comments, he said that the Hispanic who won a recent NY Marathon did so because he was being chased by Immigration for the last 10 miles (which, as a Hispanic myself, I found quite funny).

Switching channels to Fox, Senator Lieberman accuses Bush of lacking integrity.  On NBC, formerly obscure Ambassador Wilson is getting his moment of fame (on "Meet the Press"?) in his attempt to undermine the administration which sent him to verify information obtained from our British allies.  I am positive that Wilson will be retained for other similar important assignments.  I also wonder if Spielberg has already got him and his CIA analyst wife signed-up for the movie rights.  If he hurries, he can get it on televison by September 2004 with weekly re-runs.  Maybe the DNC will do a Masters- like presentation showing it without commercial interruptions featuring a prelogue by Martha Burk and a wrap-up by the senior Democrat trio of Kennedy, Dodd & Algore.    

Surely, we will learn today that Ahnold (the guy who Davis question about his suitability to govern given his inability to correctly pronounce CALIFORNIA) is really the product of Leona Helsmsley artificially inseminated with frozen Hitler sperm fortified with steroids.  The day before the election, we'll be told that Ahnold enjoys playing golf every week with Rush Limbaugh on ultra-exclusive Fazio courses, wearing cutt-off white sheets and being serviced in every way possible by shapely Japanese female caddies sans their kimonos.  All of this will be followed on Wednesday (do the liberals rest on election day?) by news of a wide Ahnold victory in CA, Rush increasing his record audience to 30 million listeners, and a new life-long contract awarded without competition to Tom Fazio to modernize the concensus top 100 Classical courses as ranked by GD, GM, and GW.

And BillV, you are no longer on Rush's list.  I do understand that France is a nice place for all the malcontents to live.  Come to think of it, perhaps not in the summer.  You would look great with a beret, goatee, and silk kerchief.  I do wonder whether you will find a game with equally sporting types; I understand that the French are not gracious winners nor good loosers.

Classical Economics to liberals is like garlic and crossess to vampires.  Where feelings and the "way things should be according to us" reign over history, human nature, trial and error, and hard data, why let a few facts get in the way?  I know a retired high school principal from a large city who is still mad and mystified with a situation that occured some 25 years ago.  It seems like a federal program provided a bunch of money for science which caused the demand for microscopes to nearly double.  Lo and behold, the price for microscopes went up and he is convinced that those dirty capitalists just stuck it in their pockets.  When our liberal friends refuse to understand supply and demand, and when our electorate can't punch ballots without separating the chads, what can we expect?    

[TEPaul]

Lou:

Here's my politics and my political preference on this Rush issue and on liberal and conservative politics and the media.

I think all American of any political persuasion should have an unalienable right to make complete asses out of themselves as publicly as possible at all times!!!

[MargaretC]

margaret- as usual you are a voice of reason however I do have some minor quibbles.

When you speak about long-ago indiscretions they all should be judged in context except for Mr. Kennedy's incident which should never be forgotton.  Also, Naomi Wolf is not long Ago but rather an effort by a friend of Mr. Gore's daughter to get him to act more like a alpha male.  This was part of his act for this campaign and is certainly not in the past.  Seems like this was the reason he approached Bush in the debate and got in his personal space.

Also. Limbaugh is an entertainer.  His views and statements should be no more bothersome to the left than when Clooney, and Sean Penn and jessica Lange speak.  No.  

you are also comparing Rush an entertainer and religous right(whoever that is) to Begala(who worked for the president at a minimum, Mcaulliffe who is chair of the dnc, and Sharpton who is a candidate for the democratic presidential nomination.

You are comparing supporters of the republicans with actual candidates and policy makers of the dems.


I will close by stating in Rush like fashion.I believe  Rev. Sharpton has gotton a free pass from the media for his past actions because he is black.

HBH:

Thanks for your kind words.  To some degree, I understand your "quibbles" because I did mix some apples and oranges in my list.

I'm no fan of Ted Kennedy and the accident which resulted in the death of Mary Jo Kopecne was tragic and, without question, showcased most, if not all, of Ted Kenedy's character flaws.  That said, IMO, after 25-30 years, it need not be raised.  I'm not minimizing the event, but people can change over time.

The "alpha male" business, albeit incredibly weird, should not have become an issue.  Many "public" persons consult "image" folks without it becoming a news item -- well, not beyond SNL because it did make for a great skit.  Gore's mistake (among a host of others) was giving his relatively inexperienced daughter too much input into the campaign.  Wearing "earth tones," alpha male stuff has no relevance, IMO, to a political campaign.

With all due respect, HBH, comparing Limbaugh to Clooney, et. al. is simply too bizarre.    I'm sure that you didn't type THAT comparison with a straight face.    Entertainers MAY, on occasion, publically express political opinions; however, their celebrity comes from outside of the political forum.  Not so with Rush Limbaugh.  He isn't an "official" political spokesperson, but at the minimum, he's a political pundit -- Webster: a learned man; a teacher; one who gives opinions in an authoritative manner

As I previously mentioned, Rush Limbaugh has a right to express his opinion.  I respect his right of free speech.  Isn't it strange that he apparently refuses to accept the right of others to "express" an opinion of HIS opinion.  

PS:  I doubt if Sharpton has gotten a "free pass" from the media solely, if at all, on the basis of race.  Sharpton, among others, have enough followers to generate headaches for the media that really aren't worth the aggravation.

Also, I enjoyed your quibbles.  

[MargaretC]

MargaretC-  I like the way you connected this thread to gca.  I am not sure that Pete Dye would appreciate it.  Of course, everything is about perspective.  And the way the language has been diluted, a fact is not a fact until all parties stipulate that it is so.  I don't need to defend Rush, Fazio, or the top 1%.  They do quite well without me.  It does irk me that some of my gca friends seem to consume so much of the garbage that is being fed by the arrogant "if you don't agree with me you are stupid or evil" Left....This is my perspective, and I can live with others thinking diametrically otherwise.

Lou:

I think Pete can handle it.

As I said in my earlier post, I do respect your opinion as well as your right to express it.

I've already mentioned that I dislike political party fanatics.  To me, "if you don't agree with me you are stupid or evil" describes not only Rush Limbaugh's attitude, but also the attitudes of other political fanatics (i.e., right, left, green, etc.).

IMHO, too often individuals forget that freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from consequences.

ESPN is a commercial enterprise.  In this regard, it's irrelevant whether Rush's remark violated any law or was racist.  Obviously, a sufficient number of viewers of ESPN didn't like it and let ESPN Execs know how much they didn't like it.  ESPN would be crazy to ignore it.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()