Detective Hogan, Thank you very much for your well-thought-out and forthright response. Jeff Dreibus (Friday Aug 29 | post #114)
Thanks, Mtnbred. I was beginning to feel like a piñata. Jeff Dreibus (Friday Aug 29 | post #109)
PITW, Oh, for Pete's sake. This whole thing about margaritas and family care evolved from my response to SuzieQ's complaint that "some people used to have to drive all the way to Morganton to get a margarita", and why don't I "let go and get out and have some fun" by getting liquored-up. I then responded that there are those in McDowell who, among other reasons, must remain at home to care for elderly or disabled parents whom they feel obliged to not consign to a nursing home. I made the choice to stay at home and care for my mother rather than put her in a place such as Sunrise and force even more psychological desperation upon her. I then pointed out that most of the "fun people" would not think twice about putting their "loved ones" into a nursing home so that they could freely cavort; in other words, it is all a matter of values and priorities. I summed it up with the observation that such a scenario certainly puts the local availability of margaritas into perspective. The "fun" people seem to find no problem in presuming to judge me; why, then, should I not presume to judge them? Now: have you not yet beat this old horse just about to death? Jeff Dreibus (Friday Aug 29 | post #108)
Cornholio, Your handle is appropriate. Our discussion is over. Jeff Dreibus (Friday Aug 29 | post #107)
Are you excited about Sarah Palin?
They said on FOX News that, among other things, Sarah Palin used to be a truck driver. Her campaign theme song could be "Little Sister Rolls Them Eighteen Wheels" . . . Jeff Dreibus (Friday Aug 29 | post #32)
Ron, I did not do so because I could not find conclusive evidence that he was a CFR member. However, your confirmation of the fact is good enough for me! Jeff Dreibus (Friday Aug 29 | post #2)
Corny, You tell yourself whatever you must to rationalize putting your loved(?) ones into the cuckoo's nest . . . and I will handle my own situation MY way. I have seen the inside of those "skilled nursing facilities", and they ain't pretty. I'm not rich, but apparently I'm crazy enough to be willing to live in "constant panic and peril". Some would say that that is what we imposed upon our parents, so I suppose it is now our turn. My entire point was: such an obligation tends to put the local availability of margaritas into perspective, now doesn't it? Jeff Dreibus (Thursday Aug 28 | post #101)
Cornholio, If I understood what you were getting at, perhaps I could give you an answer . . . Jeff Dreibus (Thursday Aug 28 | post #100)
Detective Hogan, I have no additional information for you; I am, however, a concerned citizen. I simply found it rather interesting that much was made of the Brown case being declared inconclusive (if not closed) before the LBD vote. The not-so-subtle subtext certainly seemed to be that Mr. Brown had cooked the whole thing up and that the voters should “pay no attention”. This concerns me because we know that victims of crime sometimes (often?) have little information to offer to the police regarding those who perpetrated the crime. Are they all, then, to be suspected of bearing false witness? And should their cases be suspended or closed sp quickly? And I am curious: did you happen upon my comments in the course of your professional (or private) perusal of this forum? Or did one of my fine adversaries on this thread suggest that you should "check this Dreibus guy out", or perhaps "shake him up a little bit"? Jeff Dreibus (Thursday Aug 28 | post #99)
BLU, So they chose. Now: what is YOUR problem with the fact that I pointed out the lie which was used to persuade the voters to pass it by a margin of about 100 votes? And what will your be reaction should, hypothetically, a group of voters someday CHOOSE to again try to put this issue on the ballot -- in an attempt to get it overturned? Jeff Dreibus (Thursday Aug 28 | post #98)
How about this, Suzie: since so many people don't like me, I'll set up a dunking booth downtown one day and you can stand in (the very long) line to dunk me for $10 per ball. Then I will turn over every cent of the proceeds to Citizens for Faith and Family Values simply because I know that it will aggravate to no end all of those people who stood in line to put my posterior into the water. Does THAT sound like fun? You admit that you don't even know me, yet you are certain that I have no fun. I have as much fun as I want to have, Suzie -- remember, not everyone's "Fun-O-Meter " registers "Celebration! " because they no longer have to drive forty miles round-trip to drink something which looks and tastes like radiator fluid from a large, salt-rimmed goblet. By the way, do you know how spoiled that sounds? There are people right here in this county who rarely leave the house because they are too poor, too disabled -- or because they choose to stay home and honor the obligation NOT to simply dump their elderly / disabled parent(s) into a nursing home. That is, after all, what all of the "fun" people do with mom and dad when they get old -- isn't it? One more thing: it is provable that the cost of the problems caused by liquor sales far outstrips the "increased quality of life" from that revenue source. The whole issue revolves around nothing more than selfishness: that of those who just gotta be able to get booze served to them in a glass around the corner; and that of those who get rich by participating in the resultant wealth transfer from the poor / middle class to the government / wealthy. Enjoy your Prestone margarita. Jeff Dreibus (Thursday Aug 28 | post #91)
WRONG! Liquor is indeed legal in the state of North Carolina, and I am fine with that. However, counties / cities should have the right to choose whether they wish to opt out of LBD, ABC, the lottery or any other damn thing which is nothing but a transfer of wealth to the few (and the state) at the expense of the many. So now you want to legalize marijuana. Fine, but give communities the option NOT TO HAVE IT SOLD within their borders -- and not to be forced to pay taxes on the results of people driving stoned, working stoned and parenting stoned. I'm not a bit interested in pi**ing even more of my hard-earned money away on expenses incurred by a bunch of potheads and the self-serving government which enables them. Until we can make that happen, it appears that you will have to enjoy your "herbal epiphanies" while engaging in something which is still illegal. Too bad. Jeff Dreibus (Thursday Aug 28 | post #90)
BFS, Just what we need to do: spend more state taxpayer dollars to further enable its citizens' bad habits. I don't understand why they don't simply legalize drugs. Perpetually-stoned people don't do a whole lot of thinkin', hence complainin', and the tax revenues would be sufficient to renovate several depots . . . Jeff Dreibus (Thursday Aug 28 | post #86)
Hey Leon, Where did I say that I want to "separate the children from their parents"? There is no reason to do so; they can simply return to the nation of their parents' origin with the parents. We must get this idea out of our heads that the children should automatically stay here when the illegal parents return to their home -- nothing that I am aware of prevents them from taking the anchor babies with them. "Bridges, not fences": I think we should build a bridge from the roughest part of town directly to your front yard and see if you still feel the same way . . . Jeff Dreibus (Thursday Aug 28 | post #1)
Overpopulation is a big threat to our water supply
Mike, I think you misread my post. My suggestion for "population control" involves limiting immigration. Do we need more people? No. So slam the door. We not only have a Constitutional right but a Constitutional mandate to control immigration into America. If immigration control doesn't get us a bit closer to ZPG, then for Heaven's sake let's stop PAYING people to have children. Welfare handouts need to go first, followed by eliminating tax credits for having more than two children per household. Now, does THAT sound like China where forced abortions are the rule and parents get locked up for having "too many children"? I don't know where you get the idea that I want to "tell people where they can live". Except for the illegal aliens, I don't want to tell ANYONE where to live -- and where I want the illegals to live is back in their nation of origin. Jeff Dreibus (Wednesday Aug 27 | post #46)
