BellGab.com Archive

We have laws that say that undocumented aliens may not enter or stay in the US (there are exeptions but they are very specific, having to do with human trafficking, persecution, and so on) yet, we neither amend those laws, nor enforce them. We all know about the mess in Arizona.

Please note: I am not saying that I think we should place barbed wire at our borders. I am not saying we should have a 'come one come all' policy. I'm saying, only, that whatever our policy - it should be consistent and enforceable.

Here is one of my favorite examples of this craziness from the Selective Service System:


ATTENTION, UNDOCUMENTED MALES & IMMIGRANT SERVICING GROUPS!

Selective Service does not collect any information which would indicate whether or not you are undocumented. You want to protect yourself for future U.S. citizenship and other government benefits and programs by registering with Selective Service. Do it today.



Other notes from Selective service go on to say that if an undocumented alien does not register for selective service, they injure their chances for becoming legal residents in the future.  This is just ONE of the many examples of the 'mixed message' we give on the subject of undocumented residents. Tell me, how is anyone supposed to know what is, and is not, allowed behavior?!

Can anyone claim this is not insane?

Quote from: Harmness on June 23, 2012, 02:56:20 PM
But message boards are not the place for fun!

He sounds under the influenced of something on that YouTube recording.   I'm amazed its still up even though it hasn't been for long.  He's pretty self-protective!

Quote from: DangerousBlossom on May 29, 2012, 12:44:02 AM
I remember Ian once ended a guest's interview early, but I unfortunately can't remember the guest's name.  The guest was talking about how there is a lot of bias against those who support Intelligent Design in academia.  He was talking about how they operate behind the scenes, rather than openly, to prevent ID supporters from being hired.  They also try to destroy the careers of those who already have positions.  He was giving specific examples and I thought it was quite interesting.  Ian said the guest was 'just repeating himself' and that the guest had made all his points.  He said it was actually a tribute to the guest since it demonstrated that he could cover the topic faster than expected.  I thought this was B.S., but I am not sure why he cut him off.  Ian isn't an ultra-Dawkin type generally.  Although he can be a jerk.

Wasn't it Steve Quayle ? IIRC - Qualye was on about doom and gloom, and Ian's buttons got pushed because he'd had at least one listener write to say he was about to commit suicide after a downer of a show.  There was more to it than that.  As usual, Ian wanted a discussion, and Quayle wanted a filibuster. All things considered, I think Ian handled getting Qualye off the air  graciously, but many would disagree, and did.


Here is one account of the broadcast.

Quote from: DangerousBlossom on May 05, 2012, 01:14:04 AM
I remember that interview!  Do you remember the thread and date?  It was so strange and lame.  And Ian seemed to be accepting it.  He was trying to find out if "Michael" had any qualms about the young boys stuff now that he was dead.

I remember that!  I was one of the people who was involved in the thread.  I'd also listened to the show - though now I can't recall why     The thread was a lot more fun than the show.   But honestly, I didn't get the idea that Ian was accepting it.  To me, he sounded like someone who was trying to draw out the story, but you could hear the tongue stuck in his cheek.  He was the same way with the reborn horse dude. It's interesting to me how Ian can be so gracious to some people who are off the wall, and so impatient with others.  Maybe it's just that some stories amuse him and some don't.


ETA: I just went back and skimmed over the thread.  It's funny how things that were really icky at the time can seem so funny in retrospect.  Trying to herd cats - and quell cat-fights - in that thread was no fun at the time.  Now it seems hilarious.

It's been well over a year since i listened to any c2c - new or vintage.  But I do have a copy of the 6/10 Ian show I'll boot up soon - the topic looked interesting.

Quote from: MV on July 01, 2012, 04:33:49 PM

my point was that it seems from my personal experiences with gays that a disproportionate number of them are woefully insecure.

Well hell, yes - wouldn't you be?  Thankfully, that's changing.  But yes, I get it - and I think if you'd done what you said you wished you'd done, it would have been a huge favor to you both. Live and learn I guess.

I've heard that in the fashion industry, they refer to their target market for pre-pubescent 'sex pot' clothing as 'protitots' - charming, eh?  I never raised a girl, but I knew that one rule i would have for one was NO bustier, bikini top, or any other short-cropped top until they had something to hold the damned thin in place - at least! No, not even at the beach.

Quote from: MV on June 27, 2012, 04:29:02 PM

that's exactly right. 


one of my roommates when i was 19 was a guy named terry.  he was a VERY gay drag queen.  EVERY FUCKING CONVERSATION with this guy would inevitably end up being steered (by him) toward his gayness.  always.  i've known several gay people like that who have hinged their entire identity onto being gay.  just stop it, already.  i felt like grabbing him by the collar and shouting, "BEING GAY DOESN'T MAKE YOU A BAD PERSON!!!!  YOU DON'T NEED MY APPROVAL OR CONFIRMATION!!!!"

Sounds like someone who is young and insecure, whatever their 'partition.'

Quote from: MV on July 01, 2012, 03:44:29 PM
ed dames is a pile of shit.

/thread


badum-thump

Quote from: Zircon on July 01, 2012, 03:40:21 PM
The Christian Right basically regard Mormons as a CULT. So, while he may get more of their votes than Obama, he is no slam dunk in that regard. And I am curious ... you actually fear Christians more than Marxists, Communists and those who are biding their time to strip you of your Bill of Rights? You must be a woman who is enamored by Obama. Puzzles me how professional women can support a guy who hasn't done a damn thing for them, fabricates his former associations with women and uses them a just a bucket of voters to be massaged come voting time - while being so "afraid" of a happily married father of five who is a man of faith and a successful businessman. I think many white women find white men too white.

I agree with MV also about a revolution as a viable option. Things are not going to get better anytime soon regardless of what that Manchurian candidate we now have in office says or what Romney can even hope to pull off in four short years. People are growing very impatient. The American people are usually requiring a serious kick in the ass to ever get them to do something in force. Slow to get pissed and a bunch of determined people when they finally do.

Yes, I agree. All things have a life cycle. Ours is no different. We've had a couple of major changes of direction in our short history. Others have had many centuries and even millennia. Their changes are obvious.

Yes, some.  I'm not convinced any of those groups give a shit about our rights. And though I admit that living and working in northeast academia renders me more than a little used to philosophical Marxism, it also leaves me pretty cynical about the whole thing.  When I got my M Ed in learning technologies, and wanted to focus my thesis on the practicalities of electronic education delivery rather than theory and politics, I had to get a sponsor from outside of my department. Of the two people available to me inside my department, one was simply not interested in anything I did (IMO because she's already taken as much of my research as she could for her own publications, that lead to her tenure, and wanted to spend her time with people who were working on things she could claim primary publishing credit for) and the other said (in much fancier, more academic language) that he thought I was training as a whore for edu-business and he disproved.   Fuck 'em both.

Zircon, didn't anyone ever teach you that old saw about ASS-umptions? Be less of an ass.  Ask me a question and I'll do my best to answer. Meanwhile, fuck you too.

Now there, we agree.

DAN!  FRY!  OMG the reunion continues!  How the hell are you?!

Quote from: Harmness on April 17, 2012, 06:13:23 PM
Damn bluestockings.

ROTFLM@O!  I have not heard that term for so long! (she said, smoothing her blue stockings)

If I can muster the energy to vote at all, it will be against Romney.  He's not such a bad guy really.  Massachusetts did okay with him as governor.  BUT - like all politicians he panders to the base he feels will give him the most support. Right now, while both Obama and Romney are corporate puppets, Romney also seems to have the support of the Christian Right.  They scare me. They scare me more than hopey/changie misdirection. If, OTOH, the Christian Right gets their undies in a bunch over Romney's Magic Undies - things could get interesting.  I'm not holding my breath.


As for 'same damn diff' and 'how can things change' I do think it will take revolution. What form it will take and how violent it will be is all that's up for debate IMO.  We live in a dying republic.  Will it dies quietly in it's sleep, or will it be horribly painful?


Then, it will all start again somehow.  And, for a while, that may be better.  (It also may not)


Meanwhile, our election process is BS.



The Problems with First Past the Post Voting Explained

Quote from: DAE on June 22, 2012, 10:37:28 PM
What's the deal with not finding new experts these days?  Like do they have to stick to only published authors?  Good grief... there are profoundly more experts in numerology than this lady who remains sort of a rookie level.  I miss when Art would find those backyard/garage researchers, which is often where true genius resides.  Man oh man I hate Coast to Coast AM so much now, yet there was a time I wouldn't miss a single show at all, even if I had to replay it the next day. Dammit I am frustrated.

I think it's pretty simple.  C2C is passe; even the kitsch factor is a total joke now.  No one who has any concern for their credibility will go near them.  A few years ago, when Art was still on once in a while,  I was doing PR for someone who works with sound for brainwave synchronization and sells effective and affordable software anyone can use.  I thought they should do c2c, and that I had a good chance at pitching them as a guest. They almost had a stroke when I presented the idea. They were sure that any whiff of what c2c had become would be the death knell for their company. It turned out that a lot of people who have expertise in fields that could fit the c2c format feel the same.

Add the fact that Good 'ol George has a very limited repertoire of stock responses, and the other hosts have limited time - much less authority to choose their own guests than they once did - and no matter how good they may be still suffer under the shadow of Snoory - and I think it's fair to say the question is 'why can't they GET a wider variety of guest?'  Ans: C2C is reputation poison.

If it were something brief at a more normal hour, more would be willing I'm sure.  Few are willing to pimp themselves out in a low rent zone for an hour or more in the middle of the night.

Besides - Snoory already has laminated 3x5 cards prepared for the same old song and dance he does night after night. 

Quote from: Morgus on June 30, 2012, 11:17:17 PM
Maybe but that photo is at least 30 years old...

Oh, that could well be!  But somehow the face matches the voice for me.

It's The End Of The World As We Know It (and I Feel Fine...)

Quote from: coaster on June 30, 2012, 11:04:34 PM
Is that really her? Not bad at all. She needs to lay off the Pall Malls.

FWIW - the title of the jpg is evelynpaglinidr2011

Quote from: MV on July 29, 2008, 07:55:04 PM
i am actually a bit embarrassed that i didn't mention this sooner on this site.

apollo 14 astronaut edgar mitchell who visited the moon in 1971 said in an interview to a british radio show a few days ago that aliens do in fact exist and have been visiting the planet for decades while the governments of the world have covered it up.  i have NEVER been big on the whole alien visitation thing.  i just haven't.  i really don't believe it.  however, this story makes me wonder if i should rethink my conclusions.   i mean it's EDGAR FUCKING MITCHELL saying this!!  come on!!

click here:  http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=5451107&page=1

Interesting - that article is still available, brief as it is.

Over two years late - but i actually think this is her:

Quote from: HAL 9000 on June 30, 2012, 09:16:42 PM
Are you trying to say he's a talking dick-head?

That too.

He's a low IQ talking head who'll do as he's told as long as he's allowed to stroke his own limp ego until it is temporarily engorged.

Long long ago (1970's) in a cold Maine town way up yonder - the girls in my dorm would get very bored.  We used to look for funny names in the phone book.  The all time winner was - and AFAIK still is Ophelia Cockburn.

Classic CAM!  OMG - I did miss this place.

Quote from: minim on June 27, 2012, 11:57:04 PM
I think this has the ring of truth, unfortunately.

He's still got a need to feed, though.  He's very active on Facebook.  :

First answer WRONG! on Who Wants to be a Millionaire

The fact that MV stuck a picture of his face on a picture of my body to make his avatar.


WHAT NERVE!

I figured as much. Still get no f'n respect around here.

haha - no.  truth is the damned site is still just sitting there with no content!

Quote from: HorrorReporter on June 29, 2012, 08:16:43 PM
I think Premiere is going to start playing the shows where Art is political and conservative .. After all John Wells follows

Oh Noes!  Am i the only one that is having trouble with the quote function? I'm trying to quote MV's

Quoteactually, you're dead on.

Not only is it not quoting, the post above seems to have nothing to do with it at all.