Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2008:March:12 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2008/3/12 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:49430 Activity:nil
3/12    Does Geri Ferraro not realize what a fucking hypocrite she is?
        "Clinton wouldn't be in the position she is if she was a man."
2008/3/12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49431 Activity:nil 80%like:49436
3/12    Spitzer's Kristen, 5'10" 105lbs revealed. Don't droll!
2008/3/12-13 [Transportation/Car] UID:49432 Activity:nil
3/12    I have really good medical insurance from my company. Is it
        still necessary to carry Uninsured & Underinsured Motorist,
        (state minimum $15K)? In addition, everyone in my family
        is insuranced, is there a reason to get the and Medical
        Payments which only covers $500-$2000/passenger?
        \_ I don't bother with medical. It only makes things worse, IMO,
           because the two insurances fight with each other and delay
           payment. I cancelled any auto-related medical I had. Uninsured
           motorist covers things other than medical (like loss of future
           earning capacity, pain and suffering, and related household
           expenses) but that's I risk I live with.
        \_ I was sitting at an intersection for about 8 green lights waiting
           on these morons.  The temptation to use my "right away" and plow
           right through the bikers was constantly growing
           \_ stupid troll, strike 3
2008/3/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:49433 Activity:nil
3/12    Sinbad bags on Hillary's "crisis" experience in Kosovo [washington post]
        \_ Old news, posted below on 3/10
           \_ Huh, I missed that. -op
2008/3/12-13 [Uncategorized] UID:49434 Activity:nil
3/12    Teacher at Millbrae high school filming girls in the bathroom
        \_ Another reason to keep your daughters out of suburban schools.
2008/3/12-17 [Reference/Military] UID:49435 Activity:high
3/12    "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are
        neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make
        things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they
        serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man
        may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
        -Thomas Jefferson
        \_ Yawn.  And misattributed.
           \_ Right, Jefferson was quoting Cesare Beccaria
           \_ "The said Constitution [shall] be never construed to authorize
              Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights
              of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who
              are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms."
              -Samuel Adams
        \_ Thomas Jefferson also owned hundreds of slaves, fathered several
           children with one of them, and then owned his own children as
           slaves.  So?  Times change, thankfully.  -tom
           \_ And maybe fathered several grandchildren with one of them?
           \_ revisionist liberal!!!
           \_ What ramifications does Wagner's anti-semitism have for his
              music, or Gogol's anti-semitism for his books?  Stupidest
              red herring ever. -- ilyas
              \_ The Declaration of Independence is a statement of moral
                 principles; I think the moral principles of the man who
                 wrote it are entirely relevant.  If Thomas Aquinas was
                        \_ Thomas Aquinas loved animals, not little boys,
                           isn't that right?
                 found to have been buggering altar boys, it would have an
                 impact on the value of his work.
                 Also, the underlying assumption is that because Thomas
                 Jefferson believed in individual gun ownership, that it's
                 a good idea today.  Thomas Jefferson also believed in
                 individual slave ownership; that doesn't make it a good
                 idea today.  -tom
                 \_ Thomas did some bad things, therefore all he did or said
                    was bad.  Is that your point?  Can we apply that
                    universally to all political figures or just ones who
                    wrote things you don't like?
                    \_ Nice straw man.  Please try reading my post next time.
                    \_ They weren't considered bad things at the time, that
                       is the whole point. Moral standards and society
                       change over time. The rules for gun ownership for
                       a frontier society are probably not going to make
                       sense in an urban society. This is why I support
                       local gun control laws only, btw.
                       \_ This is all tapdancing around the real issue, which
                          is that "we" don't want to give guns to hoods and
                          gangbangers, but do want to give them to hobbyists,
                          and normal law-abiding folks.  However, the
                          distinction is apparently very hard to legislate.
                          Plus I guess even pointing this out can get one
                          accused of racism since hoods and gangbangers are
                          predominantly ethnic. -- ilyas
                          \_ No, it is more subtle than that. It is not always
                             clear what a "normal law-abiding folk" is. What
                             about a guy with a DUI? Busted for smoking pot
                             20 years ago? And we already have laws on the
                             books to keep guns out of the hands of felons,
                             they are just really hard to enforce, when
                             everyone else can get a gun so easily.
                 \_ That doesn't make it a bad idea today either.
                    \_ I agree; what Thomas Jefferson had to say about
                       gun owernship 200+ years ago has pretty much no
                       relevance to whether it's a good idea today.  -tom
                       \_ Thomas Jefferson 200 years ago or tom today... hmmm,
                          this is a tough call... who to side with?  People
                          are still people, guns are still guns, etc.  I think
                          I'll go with Jefferson, thanks.  Simply saying time
                          has passed is not a reason to dismiss what he had
                          to say.
                       \_ Well, he gave an argument. He didn't just say,
                          "Gun ownership is good and I'm Jefferson." The only
                          real difference is that gun technology has advanced.
                          \_ Plus the small matter of the invention of the
                             tank.  Guns are significantly easier for
                             lawbreakers to use and significantly less
                             easy to use in defense against the government,
                             relative to Jefferson's time.  Orders of magnitude
                             different in each direction.   -tom
                             \_ The insurgents have shown that small arms
                                can be effective against an opposing force
                                with tanks, planes, &c.
                                \_ Only if you fight them with kid gloves on.
                                   \_ The operations in Iraq may not be "nuke
                                      & pave" but clearly kid gloves is not
                                      an accurate characterization.  It is
                                      likely that any domestic operation by
                                      the government would be similarly
                                      restrained (there are still red voters
                                      in blue states).
                                      Even if the operations in Iraq are being
                                      fought with "kid gloves," this was not
                                      the case in Vietnam.
                             \_ You are a complete fucking idiot if you think
                                you can use tanks against insurgency.  Tanks are
                                for breaking frontlines, holding territory
                                you can use tanks against insurgency.  Tanks
                                are for breaking frontlines, holding territory
                                against conventional armies, and defense a la
                                artillery.  You cannot use tanks to suppress
                                a civilian population.  Germans certainly didn't
                                artillery.  You cannot use tanks to suppress a
                                civilian population.  Germans certainly didn't
                                in World War 2 (and they pioneered appropriate
                                tank use in war).  You should probably stop
                                talking about things you don't have a clue
                                about.  A good modern example of a successful
                                uprising with guns vs tanks is israel vs
                                palestinians, btw. -- ilyas
                                palestinians, btw. -- ilyas  [formatd]
                                \_ "successful"?
                                   \_ The palestinians keep gaining land and
                                      somehow the sympathy of the world.  The
                                      Israelis are under constant siege and
                                      living in a permanent state of fear.  I'd
                                      say the palestinians are winning with the
                                      world's help.
                                      \_ what does that have to do with guns?
                                         \_ The point is asymmetric warfare
                                            against a government works, and the
                                            second point is that the
                                            palestinians would be toothless if
                                            they didn't have portable rockets,
                                            and bombs, and yes guns.  If you
                                            don't like this example, read up
                                            on the successful partisan movement
                                            in USSR during the second war.
                                                -- ilyas
                                            \_ Asymmetric warfare doesn't
                                               require individual gun
                                               \_ Asymmetric warfare is greatly
                                                  aided by individual gun
                                                  ownership, as the ff's
                                                  pointed out.  If you have an
                                                  "ideological" stance against
                                                  it, as tom likes to say, you
                                                  will need a better reason
                                                  than TANKS! though.  -- ilyas
                                \_ The Israelis are living in a constant state
                                   of fear? How do you think the Gazans feel?
                                   What has been the Gaza vs. Israel casualty
                                   \_ I'm not sure if this is more funny or
                                      sad that we have palestinian
                                      sympathizers on the motd.  I figured the
                                      motd would attract a smarter crowd in
                                      general who wouldn't fall for that sort
                                      of propaganda.  Anyway, I'll answer your
                                      question an old quote,
                                        "When Arab Mothers love their children
                                         more than they hate the Jews there
                                         will be peace".
                                      Ponder and gain wisdom.
                                      \_ That quote is racist.
                                         \_ Are you new here?  On the motd
                                            you're supposed to only say,
                                            "\_ RACIST!" as a form of
                                            anti-PC mockery.  It isn't a
                                            serious statement.  It is one of
                                            the lower forms of intellectual
                                            laziness.  Care to try again or
                                            are you happy thinking the only
                                            democracy in the middle east, the
                                            only country in the ME that has
                                            women voting, holding office, etc,
                                            the only country that has minority
                                            population voting and holding
                                            offfice, etc, etc, etc, is somehow
                                            the enemy while the people who
                                            wrap their kids in bomb jackets
                                            and send them into pizza parlors
                                            are somehow freedom fighters and
                                            heroic?  Again, it is sad that
                                            people who are supposed to be so
                                            smart have sucked up the propaganda
                                            like such useful idiots always do.
                                            \_ Your quote wasn't serious
                                               either and not worth addressing
                                               seriously. Of course it's
                                               racist, it's a blanket
                                               denigration of Arabs, and it
                                               implies that Palestinians commit
                                               commit acts of violence merely
                                               because they hate Jews and that
                                               is all there is to consider.
                                               If you are able to frame your
                                               argument in a meaningful way
                                               then I could respond more
                                               meaningfully. You're now
                                               ascribing beliefs to me that I
                                               didn't say. It's probably not
                                               worth having serious discussions
                                               with people who do that: set up
                                               straw men and employ vague
                                               emotional "reasoning".
                                               \_ There is nothing emotional
                                                  about it.  How about you
                                                  respond to what I said
                                                  about women, minorities and
                                                  the rest?  Those are cold
                                                  \_ What about them?
                                                  have facts yet in your reply
                                                  you toss around empty
                                                  accusations of emotionalism
                                                  because the truth is too
                                                  strong to deny so you go
                                                  personal.  Reply to what I
                                                  said.  You've said nothing
                                                  more than scream "RACIST!"
                                                  so far.  That isn't the
                                                  most intellectually rigorous
                                                  response from someone who
                                                  claims to want intellectual
                                                  rigor.  I can get better on
                            \_ In this particular quote, Jefferson did not
                               mention the anti-government aspect but only the
                               anti-criminal. I'd guess the main criminal aid
                               today is concealability. This factor would
                               argue towards a ban on handguns, not guns
                               altogether. (I'm not advocating that though.)
           \_ It is unclear that Jefferson actually fathered Sally Hemmings'
        \_ As an aside, I find the 'America was a frontier society in the old
           days but not today' argument amusing in a wishful thinking kind of
           way.  There is huge political resistance in America to outright
           handgun bans.  Clearly our society is 'frontier enough,' even today.
             -- ilyas
2008/3/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:49436 Activity:high 80%like:49431
3/12    Spitzer's Kristen, 5'5" 105lbs revealed. Don't drool!
        \_ ANOREXIA!!!
        \_ No way is that woman 105 pounds.
           \_ How about this one:
              I'm guessing 5'5" 100lbs.
              \_ More like 115-120.
                 \_ Depends on how tall she is. 115-120 is not thin for a
                    woman who is 5'2". More like 95-100. Models are
                    usually about 5'9" 120.
                    \_ Well look at the MOTORCYCLE!!! The in-seam height
                       of a CBR600RR is about 32-32.5". Extrapolate, and
                       you'll get the actual height. I can't do it now
                       because I'm at work.
          \_ Liberal new york times.
             \_ You crack me up.  So, when the NYT reports the biggest scandal
                of the moment, and it happens to be to a hypocrite Dem, that
                means they're not Liberal?  Or what does your post mean?
           \_ Wait he paid $5K a trip for her? WTF I wouldn't pay over
              $285/session for this woman. I can get better looking
              women for only $300-500/session.
              \_ Why do you go to hookers?
        \_ C?  Looks more like a B to me.
           \_ Some of us have seen real breasts. That's a nice full C in that
              \_ My ex had D and my wife has A.  I've seen and touched them
                 countless times.  IMHO the ones in the pic look closer to A
                 than to D.  So I guessed they're B.  -- PP
                 \_ So in other words you have very little boob experience.
2008/3/12-13 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:49437 Activity:nil
3/12    I watch BBC everyday to get away from US news yet it keeps
        talking about Clinton vs. Obama. Really pisses me off.
2008/3/12-13 [Reference/Military, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:49438 Activity:nil
3/12    hey emarkp, if pre-emptive strike works so well, how come the
        israelis are still fighting? what's your stance on the iraq war now?
        \_ Hey anonymous troll, what's your stance on signing your
           posts? -ausman
        \_ Wow, talk about out of left field.  I have an email address.  Feel
           free to use it. -emarkp
2008/3/12-17 [Transportation/Car/Hybrid] UID:49439 Activity:kinda low
3/12    US Use of Public Transportation Highest in 50 Years
        \_ Where's Los Angeles?
        \_ "In 2004, the latest year for which the data is available, all
           modes of public transit accounted for 49 billion passenger miles;
           total vehicle miles travelled in the US is around 3 trillion per
           year."  Sigh, still way too little to be significant.  I hope high
           gas prices are steering more people to public transit.
           \_ Why is this something you hope for?
              \_ So assholes like you who live in the make belief world
                 of endless energy in Southern Cal will realize that
                 you're raping mother earth and killing everyone else.
                 \_ We have practically endless energy. It's called nukular.
                    I am more concerned about you Prius-driving idiots
                    using all of our precious water for your batteries.
                    \_ One needs to add water to the Prius battery??
                       \_ No, but the generation of power requires water.
                          Unless you go nukular, which "green" people oppose.
                          \_ One doesn't charge the Prius battery with
                             electricity from electric company.  (Unless you
                             modify a Prius to become a plug-in.)
              \_ We must force people to live in the true Urban Utopia for
                 their own good.
                 \_ No, just let the Invisible Hand do its work.
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2008:March:12 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>