Speaking of guns, if he had a more pro-gun record, I could almost not mind him.  In that respect, I'd much rather see him than Clinton, because that clan supported the Brady Bill once, and we're finally recovering from the expiration on that one.  Don't need to see something like that get railroaded in again.

he's right about pennsyvlania. i lived there for years near where hillary grew up. she did nothing for the area.

and bring on the gun control candidate, i don't give a fuck. that issue is the furthest thing from the front this time. you're being tricked into thinking its important.

i've grown up with guns, owned guns, would own some now if i didn't live in NYC where i have to (as you know) have them registered even if they're in my apartment. and even then i might get some soon.

this is like abortion, nothing much will change. you better start worrying if they get lobbyist controls in place.

I don't believe in universal healthcare, and would be opposed to it even if it were completely free to taxpayers.  That's my stronger point of contention.  But even there, I see Obama as less threatening than Hillary.

The gun issue is still worth noting.  Even as recently as following the VA Tech incident, insane gun control measures were put forth.  If/when I have kids some day, I'll want to raise them shooting just like I was, without having to break innumerable laws to get my hands on an autoloading rifle.

yeah, i hear you. over reaction to these school and other random shootings will happen, unfortunately. same thing with these video games being blamed - all silliness. what we need is people to make the case for the opposite when this shit happens, and not the same blogger clearing-house nonsense that people regurgitate. in their own words.

i've got a friend who used to sell stuff (all legal of course) and would sell the kit to, to make it from what he legally could sell to what he legally couldn't. as long as the sale was made BEFORE the change, it was legal.

as far as health care, i don't have a stand really. i've had good solid healthcare for over 2 decades and i don't go to the doctors at all. if i ever do, i go to a specialist to avoid them looking at any other areas. i had a jaw problem a few months ago and went right to ear, throat nose guy. i;d rather die from something like cancer than find it too early.

so i don't understand the people who do need it routinely. i can't comment on it really.

I agree with you completely on healthcare.  Why on earth anyone would want to know they're dying is beyond me!

we're all dying (don't shoot the messenger).

Every breath I take is one less that I've got to go, no matter how you look at it.

exactly. better it kill you then years of fighting, maybe waiting for it to come back, rehabilitation, dietary restrictions, etc etc. i don't fear death. 

Me neither.  It's a pity how much of their lives people spend worrying about death.

The gun issue is... very unimportant right now. I couldn't agree more. Like we don't have anything more important to think about than the tired old issues they take out of the closet on even years. Abortion, Guns... neither of these issues are of great importance.

there's more flak coming down the pipe
we'll see

I wanted to be sure you got this reply so I used your latest blog to get to you:

 

The pertinence of Douglas Adams' observation exploded on my mind like a 4th of July celebration in a darkened sky.  I love it...it makes all the sense in the world!   However, consider this.  What if, "their apparent disinclination to do so",  is actually attributable to their inability to comprehend the nuance of an experience based on limited powers of deduction.  How then, could full benefit of the lesson be attained?  After all, one cannot make sense with one who has little or no sense...just as the full height of reason will never be experirnced by one who is less than totally reasonable. Only God can make something out of nothing and that's the truth.

 

Have you ever heard the expression, "he/she had NO understanding!" (usually said of some one who is in an irrational mode and usually assessed by one who has only pedestrian powers of duction)....my point being, "One is only capable of processing information through the lens of ones own understanding."

 

nice chatting with you , Jesse.

 

lovespirit

p.s.   it's late and I'm only capable of making so much sense after midnight....smile

It could be attributable to limited powers of deduction, I suppose... but still...

I like to think that almost all of us are CAPABLE of objectivity, empathy, sympathy, and, in general, seeing from another's point of view. Some are less likely to do so than others in most instances, but they are capable. With practice, I think it even becomes easier.

To me, there is a certain mindset that is actually counterproductive to understanding information, and manifests itself in the disinclination to understand information objectively. It is probably true that we can't think too far outside of our boxes, but I think with practice, you can come to understand where other people are coming from quite easily, which is important in processing information objectively.

Have you have heard of the term Machiavellian? I have come to the conclusion that even if people aren't Machiavellian themselves, sometimes they embrace those that are. I suspect those people that are still supporting G.W. Bush at this juncture are RWAs (Right-Wing Authoritarians), RWA are not necessarily leaders, but devoted followers... and they just happen to typically be devoted conservatives when it comes to politics, but even liberals can by RWAs.

You should read about Machiavellianism, Social Dominance Orientation, and Right-Wing Authoritarianism. It is very enlightening to know about when interacting with others in this sort of medium. Some people have a harder time being objective because they hold tightly to what they believe, and what they believe could be built on a lifetime of illogical subjectivity.

Hi, Jesse...

 

Just wanted to touch base and let you know I'm not avoiding you.  Today is a 'crunch' day for me...no, I'm not in school...I'm a freelance script editor and when adherence to a shooting schedule is dependent on my diligent promptness, everything else goes on the back burner.  Right now, I'm working 24/7 to meet a deadline...just came on to answer some mail that required a slower brain gear...you, on the other hand don't leave much room for down shifting...btw, of course I've read 'The Prince", and in a nutshell, personally, I'd rather be loved (but there's something about above average intelligence that makes people fear you...smille), we can talk about everything later.

 

lovespirit

Ah, well... you don't have to be prompt with me! And I'm not paying you. So it is probably best that you don't spend all your time replying to crazy liberals like me.

I haven't read The Prince yet... it is one of the books on the eventual list. I might have to bump it up, because it seems like something relevant. 

Hi, Jesse,

 

Illogical subjectivity!!!?  SPOT ON, dear fellow die-hard liberal! 

 

The mind-stupefying (personally coined phrase), tragically condensible truth is we live in a nation of "sheople/sheeple" (another of my coined clarifying workables), i.e., people ( easily comparable to sheep) who have relegated their autonomy (whether mindfully or unaware) to the hands of a select few under the guise of "trusting", for the sake of being relieved of reponsibilty for their own lives.  I think the primary motivation in these cases, is 'laziness', those being the ones who are willing to "..go along to get along...". 

Of course, all of this, as is everything, is open for discussion.  The use of the word, 'primary' sets it up for exploration, huh?