Semi-OT: Went to an auction

Page 2 of 3  
Malcom "Mal" Reynolds wrote:

Huh? There's no conflict. I'd heard your version, but I didn't include it because I didn't want to be loquacious.
Besides, as a Jew, Josephus would have had a completely different definition of "prophet" than your source makes out. In Judaism, a prophet is one who warns and all Jewish prophecy is a conditional of the form "if (something) then (something)." Utterings by Jewish prophets need never come true.
Consider the prophet Jonah. When burped up by a whale on the shores of Nineveh, Jonah warned the citizens (prophesied) that they repent or God would destroy their city. They wore sackcloth and ashes and repented. Nothing happened to Nineveh.
In your version, Josephus would have been a "soothsayer," not a prophet.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

and he still wouldn't have been spared because Vespasian "liked" him
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 20:03:27 -0400, "Robert Green"

Um, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 votes:
Original House bill: Democrats 152-96 (61%-39%) Republicans 138-34 (80$-20%)
Senate Cloture Democrats 44-23 (66%-34%) Republicans 27-6 (82%-18%)
Final Senate bill Democrats 46-21 (69%-31%) Republicans 27-6 (82%-18%)
House vote Democrats 153-91 (63%-37%) on senate version Republicans 136-35 (80%-20%)
When you start out with such lies, there is no point in reading the rest of your crap.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Oct 19, 11:40 pm, " snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"

Looks like a quote of the Wiki entry. I found this part, right after the above, more interesting:
By party and region
Note: "Southern", as used in this section, refers to members of Congress from the eleven states that made up the Confederate States of America in the American Civil War. "Northern" refers to members from the other 39 states, regardless of the geographic location of those states.
The original House version:
Southern Democrats: 7–87 (7%–93%) Southern Republicans: 0–10 (0%–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145-9 (94%–6%) Northern Republicans: 138-24 (85%–15%)
The Senate version:
Southern Democrats: 1–20 (5%–95%) Southern Republicans: 0–1 (0%–100%) Northern Democrats: 45-1 (98%–2%) Northern Republicans: 27-5 (84%–16%)
Not really that surprising, I guess, still it's interesting to see it in...ummm...black and white.
R
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Irrelevant. The other leftist's statements are blown away by the facts.

Perhaps interesting, but still irrelevant, as you normally are.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<snip>
This happened before I was in the US. I believe the Democrat LB Johnson was the instigator of the legislation. It is gratifying as well as disappointing to see that (overall) Republicans of yore were more progressive than Democrats were at the time. Now, how I wish that were the case today.
In social aspects I'm "progressive", but that doesn't mean I fAVor handouts. Au contraire. In fiscal aspects I'm "conservative", which in my case means, the budget should income and expenses that come close to balanced, preferably with a little more income to cover eventualities. Investments by government should go to education, infrastructure, and perhaps defense, in that order. I'm in favor of free trade, but make sure that "the other guy" doesn't subsidize his exports. The tax book should be 100 pages or shorter, in 11 point or bigger.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, the "progressives" of today are like the "progressives" of the 1920s; hell bent on destroying the country. The Democrats of the '60s were *very* conservative, in contrast.

How can you balance the budget when the government hands out more an more (to unions)?
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

few GOP" votes and 80% of the caucus hardly qualifies as a few. Interesting that they then had to go by region to find something that made no difference. The FACTS remain that a higher percentage of the GOP caucus voted for it than did the Dem caucus. The GOP was the ONLY reason that cloture was invoked, even though the Dems had enough to do it on their own if they were really the ones interested in getting it passed.
--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

"They" had to go by region? Is the "they" you refer to Wiki? Me and someone else? I did not argue either way - the vote was what it was and easily discovered. I merely added the breakdown that took the argument away from the Red State Blue State bullshit, and added interest to people that are actually interested in history as opposed to supporting their political worldview.
In future, I would appreciate it if you wouldn't put my dog in a fight for me. In return, I won't put you on the NAMBLA mailing list. Thanks! ;)
I still find it interesting that the Southern Republicans were willing to turn their backs on their party for something they didn't believe in, and to do it in a pretty much unanimous vote. This rarely happens today.
I would also ask one more thing of you - use your quoting powers to include proper attribution when posting. It makes it easier for everybody to follow who said what in the thread. If it's not worth the attribution, it's not worth quoting. TIA.
R
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
...gets his butt kicked and cries to mommy.
<snip>
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

See what I said earlier about rewriting history. You look at the actual votes as they took place, a HIGHER percentage of the GOP voted for it then the Dems. The original House version: € Democratic Party: 152-96   (61%-39%) € Republican Party: 138-34   (80%-20%) Cloture in the Senate: € Democratic Party: 44-23   (66%­34%) € Republican Party: 27-6   (82%­18%) The Senate version: € Democratic Party: 46-21   (69%­31%) € Republican Party: 27-6   (82%­18%) The Senate version, voted on by the House: € Democratic Party: 153-91   (63%­37%) € Republican Party: 136-35   (80%­20%)
When the bill came to the Senate, LBJ and Mike Mansfield did an end run around the Dem-controlled Judiciary and sent it directly to the Senate. The bill came before the full Senate for debate on March 30, 1964 and the "Southern Bloc" of 18 southern Democratic Senators and ****one*** Republican Senator led by Richard Russell (D-GA) launched a filibuster to prevent its passage. The GOP had roughly the same %ages voting for cloture which made it possible. Hard to suggest that 80% of the GOP was "a few" to use your words.

--
People thought cybersex was a safe alternative,
until patients started presenting with sexually
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:44:20 -0400, "Robert Green"

I was always under the same mistaken impression, mostly by the logical inference from the so-called "Southern Strategy" and how the Republican party made gains in the south. It's a question of timing. It's easy to forget the former Republican strength in the north, and that the party was loaded with moderates and "liberals." What's really funny is how the current crop of Republicans worships Ronald Reagan. He was a flaming "liberal" compared to them.
I'm surprised you fell into this with your background. Fact-checking is easy. I don't trust either side to tell the truth.
--Vic
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I still remember the things I got wrong on tests from the sixth grade. I did not know, then, what "superficial" meant. I got a 780 on my verbal GRE because I missed "homologous" and confused "mendacious" with "mendicant." I also screwed up and missed a perfect score in my Journalism final in news reporting by confusing "miscegenation" with "misogyny." I seriously disappointed my HS AP biology teacher who expected me to get 100 on the NY State AP test but I got "mitosis" and "meiosis" confused along with three other fairly simple questions.

HB
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HB
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

I don't recall ever commenting on the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
As to the vote totals: House: 80% of the Republicans supported the bill while only 61% of the Democrats did
Senate: Cloture: 82% of the Republicans and 66% of the Democrats Final passage: 82% of the Republicans and 69% of the Democrats. Only 46 Democrats (out of 67) voted for the bill. Twenty-three (out of 31) Republicans voted for it.
Were it not for the Republicans, the 1964 Civil Rights Act would not have passed, and, while not unanimous, Republican support for the bill was significantly stronger than that of the Democrats.
Plus, I don't think there WERE any Republicans in the South in 1964. Goldwater carried the South in 1964, but he didn't get elected. I was an Administrative Aide to John Tower and he was elected in 1966.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Oren wrote:

She divorced me. Said I was too much of a wuss; it was no fun abusing me. Last I heard, she fell for a Latin dance instructor with a pencil-thin mustache named "Gomez."
Going on...
You may remember Isaac Asimov. He wrote over 500 books on everything from college chemistry texts to "Asimov's Guide to the Holy Bible" (2 volumes), "Asimov's Guide to Shakespeare" and "Asimov's Guide to Greek and Roman Mythology." If one had to list the top ten books of all time in Science Fiction, most would agree that Asimov would have two: "The Foundation Series" and "I, Robot."
Who could put up with such a brilliant and eccentric soul? Well, his wife was a psychiatrist, which probably helped in marital harmony.
I'm certainly not in the same league as Asimov, but my current squeeze is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker, an adjunct professor, and is the intake clinician at a psychiatric hospital.
We get along SWELL! Every time I rush in with my latest brainstorm, she says "And how do you fell about that?" This is often followed by: a) "I see. Very interesting. Tell me more." or b) "Let's talk about your mother."
Trust me on this: Her reactions are far superior to being hit in the face with a frying pan.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

To my mind that would be four books - a trilogy plus one. But that's a quibble. It also depends on the Top SF Books list you look at. Asimov has 7 of the top 50 SF books. There are 6 books on the list from the 1800's.
I started reading the prequel trilogy to Foundation - one book written by each of the Killer B's (Benford, Baer & Brin). I have yet to read the third one.
It's mind-boggling that Foundation hasn't been made into a movie franchise yet. The stuff has been optioned and some mucking about with development, but nothing recently.
Here's a good SF flow chart to help people figure out what books to read.
http://www.box.net/shared/static/a6omcl2la0ivlxsn3o8m.jpg

He worked like a dog, sat down at his typewriter and wrote for eight hours a day. He didn't muck about waiting for inspiration. He was a veritable font of knowledge on almost every known front, a phenomenal story teller and a great public speaker, had a great sense of humor (a dirty one), and if you could get past his looks anyone would fall in love with him. Read his autobiography if you haven't. Good stuff. I have an autographed copy. No, I won't lend it to you.
R
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 11:25:46 -0700 (PDT), RicodJour

Glad this marked OT. I was a sci-fi fan for some years. Excepting Asimov and Heinlen, all anthologies of short stories and novelettes. Since you're a "real" fan, I'm curious about your favorite sci-fi movies. Good movies are often overlooked, but still available on Netflix. Maybe you can put me onto to something. My favorites so far are 2001 and Blade Runner, which both had some depth.
--Vic
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
<stuff snipped>

As Professor Frink said on episode "I, (Annoyed Grunt)-Bot" or "I, D'oh!-Bot" of the Simpsons: "Some of them not so good!"

I supposed I'd have to agree with the last but I remember more of the former than the later. Staten Island named a street Trantor Pl. and driving past it weekly always gave me a "Foundation" flashback - I recall the Mule, Hari Seldon (could be from I, Robot - the mind is fading) and more and ripping through them as a teen as fast as I could read.
This thread finally got me to open my birthday gift of the entire set of the black and white Outer Limits DVDs. Unexpectedly, watching it gave me goosebumps. For the first time I realized that most of us here have lived through a time where we saw science fiction turn into science fact.
OL's got cheesy FX, but at the time we didn't know any better. Some great actors at the start of their careers who went on to much bigger roles and some for whom their OL role was their last. Beautiful music, B&W cinematography that was motion picture quality and almost always a strong moral theme woven into the storyline. I may have to re-read "Foundation" and home that Tom Wolfe was wrong when he said you can't go home again.

Call us when you've written your 499th book. You've probably written enough Usenet posts to make at least a few dozen very wide-rangind books - soon Kindles will be starving for discount literature. Get on the train early! (-:

Ah, you mean she's a professional, trained to deal with walking insanity. A perfect match. (-:
My wife's a logistician and keeps my hoarding behavior in check. That's partially because as an Army brat, she moved so often she was conditioned to live with few person possessions. The less you own, the less you have to schelp around. I get to fill up the leftover space but the week, I'm on track to fill up three 40 gallon trash and recyling carts because I've starting spilling over into no-man's land. Quite literally!
Back to the cull. Who hoards old medicine bottles? C'mon - confess!!!!
-- Bobby G.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Robert Green wrote:

I take that as a compliment. Thank you.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.