Neo-con? I wont even bother to respond to that.I only call them as I see them sorry that you agree with presidents that borrow money like a drunken sailor that stole donald trumps American express.

lrisner wrote: I hear Ya mike. I should have known better than to post on here. I just had personal knowledge of the project in question and offered to share it. My mistake was in not adding some anti O'Bama bias. Without that bias, it is not considered legitimate info on this site. You and Paccy, and Bo, and others on here are like Play Ground bullies. You stick together and spout ur nonsense. That is, sadly, where internet  forums have went. Basically they are now nothing more than sites pandering to the views of the site owner. The only worth while discussion any more is when someone like me rocks the boat of all you like minded "thinkers". You blow all your garbage and criticism without offering a single decent opposing idea. You bring up things, maybe it makes sense to you, but generally they are shallow thoughts completely unworkable in a modern society. Section 8 is a perfect example. I don't like it either, but without it we wouldn't have 3000 empty house, we would have 4000 empty ones. Any way, go ahead make your childish jokes. The real people of the World will keep trying to solve the problems of the World. When we are done, you all can post on here how it would have worked better your way.

No, Irisner, once again you’ve gotten it wrong.

I offered no comments, nor took any position, on the “personal knowledge of the project in question and offered to share”.  I neither “bullied” anyone nor did I “stick together” with anyone.  Nor did I “pander to the views of the owner of the site”, nor did I mention one single word either in favor of or against our present president.  All of that is abundantly clear to anyone who can read the thread up to this point.  (At least it should be...I had made no posts at all up until my one short attempt at humor.)

I merely responded to one direct question in your comments on this PUBLIC forum, “Humor is an emotion, right?” I tried to do so in a humorous fashion, but apparently that was lost on you.  I feel badly for you about that…I truly do.

I believe that humor is a quality, or the ability to perceive, enjoy, or express what is amusing, comical, incongruous, or absurd.  I suggest that you lighten up a bit and try to enjoy what short bit of time we mere mortals have left on this mud-covered ball of iron.  I am sorry if I have offended you by not having been more surly.

Oh…and I promise never again to call you “Shirley”!!!   

lrisner wrote: B.S.!, Mike.......you are one of the "Panderers" here. Please don't feel bad for me. I feel very superior to you, to be honest.  I am "cursed" (in our society, anyway) with awareness. A quality far too rare in American Culture today. Sadly, you will not have a clue of what I speak until it is too late.

Oh, Irisner, you are so great!!!  I apologize for quoting your actual words and responding to them point-by-point.  I should have known that questioning someone of your high “awareness” and “superiority” was folly.  Please excuse me for not having “a clue of what I [you] speak”, but I notice that you were not able to actually cite even a single actual quote of mine to back up the things of which you accuse me.

(If expressing gratitude to the purveyors of this forum for making available the single local website of which I am aware, that commoners are permitted to express their opinions without being censored is “pandering”, then I happily plead “guilty”!!!  Aside from that I’d say that your “awareness” is convoluted, and is, indeed, a “curse”.)

Regardless of the forgoing, might I remind you that you are perfectly free to simply ignore my posts if they cause you such consternation, and turn your valuable time and superior intellect toward the musings of other liberal thinkers with whom you seem to be more in agreement?   To use your very own words, if you “should have known better than to post on here”, and if it troubles you so, then don’t.  That seems to be quite a simple solution.

I am sincerely sorry that I have seemed to trouble you so.

"Every man I meet is in some way my superior, and in that, I learn from him." … R. W. Emerson 

Mike_Presta wrote: "Every man I meet is in some way my superior, and in that, I learn from him." … R. W. Emerson

On the other hand, neither I nor Mr. Emerson have ever actually met Irisner.

Well written Tony! I agree that a lot of what you say is true. The comment "a true "genius" knows how profoundly ignorant he truly is." is my personal main stay. That seems odd given my boldness here, but if one is in France, one needs to speak French. I am simply adapting my linguistic approach to the audience I have. Being modest would only inflame most of those on here into thinking they were indeed effectively rebutting my argument. You may well be an adversary worth debating with. You were way off course with your “dig at those who don't share your political affiliation” assumption however. My dig was at small minded people who wouldn’t know a Watermelon from an ear of corn if some Political Pundit didn’t tell them the difference. It was a dig at inexcusable ignorance.

"I'm also struck by your assertion that you are a "real" conservative."

Why is that? Could your contemporary concept of conservatism be wrong? I think so. Words get changed meanings over time. My Grandmother would routinely use the word “gay” to describe someone energetic and playful, with no sexual connotation. Could your idea of “conservatism” be equally altered contemporary just as “gay” was?

My conservatism recognizes that Human beings need time to adjust to change. That applies to economic theory as well, since without human beings there is NO economics at all, let alone theory. To insure a stable, gradually adjusting economic system, we have to rely on consistent economic Policy and gradual change. Your assertion that free markets reign is an example of how neo conservatism is a contemporary ideal and not traditional conservatism.  I actually think this neo con idea that free markets are so great is a quite stupid idea.

Free Markets do have a place in an overall economic Policy. However, they are just as flawed as any other economic idea that one could come up with. Look at the ungoverned portioned of Africa and you will see what unrestrained Free Markets are about. Anyone wanting that has to be crazy. Free Markets only work when government is there to keep them civilized and prevent the creation of lawless Boom Towns that we saw in our own history in the old West, when the abundance of natural resources overwhelmed our then immature Government.

Tony, you mentioned the consumerism that has driven our economy. I am pleased you see that. Tell Paccy and the other knotheads that don’t realize that the Middle class has to be economically successful for the general economy to prosper.  Mr Kaisch and his cronies are trying very hard to continue the idiocy that brought about the decline of the middle class and the resulting decline in our economy. Most of the people of this site promote those ridiculous ideas without realizing that their own personal decline is the RESULT of those policies. THAT is the brainwashing I am fighting on this site.

 As to my solutions for Middletown, I will repeat them AGAIN. ACCEPT the decline. It is demographic in nature and no one’s fault. That fault lies in spending money to try and bring back what will NEVER come back.  Cut Staff by 30%. ALL Staff.  For God sakes, quit subsidizing things like the Golf Course. Sell the damn thing!!  Don’t do MiddFest, we can’t afford it. We have no money for any thing!  I disagree with Josh usually, but support his Infrastructure Budget proposal as we have no choice but to keep the roads.

Now to Kemp/Roth….that was 30 years ago and Tax structure was pretty much opposite of what it is now. At that time, it was an appropriate action and needed to be done. Cutting taxes now for the wealthy is absolute stupidity and the support for it we see on sites like this is nothing more than validation of my “brainwash” theory.

You all emotionally react to me defending the Unions against such things as SB5. That is because you are NOT adults and just want to whine! I never said the Unions shouldn’t have to take cuts. It is simply THEIR decision, by virtue of legal contracts, as to HOW those cuts take place. Management has the right to control levels of employment but not the right to change the terms of contracts that they have already agreed to.  Your whining about the Medical benefits and your REFUSAL to discuss the concept of TOTAL COMPENSATION proves my point about childishness. I am NOT against cuts to the Union, I AM against childish attacks on their contract.

Anyway, any more from me would require you all to pay tuition, LOL.

If that pisses you off, then you have no sense of humor in addition to being childish.

 

Irisner:

Your latest load of puffery and self-aggrandizement has convinced me of your fragile grasp on reality, and made me sorry that I have ridiculed you. 

lrisner wrote: Well, DICK, I haven't heard from you on this issue till now. Did it take you that long to come up with something at least symbolically witty?

Well, IRIS, if by “this issue” you mean AK’s blast furnace gas project, I refrained from commenting because the two posts you made relating to that subject contained at least bits of accuracy and I saw no need to correct you on a rather esoteric subject.

If by “this issue” you mean your irrational braggadocio, I refrained because you were doing such a good job of making a fool of yourself that I felt you were in no need of assistance in doing so.