Politics and Steam

Gordy

Mad Dog said:

Perhaps we are an anomaly in your "study," Bob, but Steamhead (MY ol' buddy) and I are Psycho about The Steam and DEFINITELY on opposite sides of the barricades! If I had to.guess, Frankie is Feelin' The Bern these days whilst I am in front on the Locamotive of the Trump Express... So, more Libs you guessing are in to The Steam? Mad Dog

It comes down to the best applicant for the job. Is the steam existing, and salvageable? Should it be ripped out because it's beyond any means of salvaging? Should HW be given a chance since it has more versatility? Or should one just ditch everything known to hydronisists in their arsenal to subdue themselves to hot, and cold air because that is the norm.........

Steamhead

Mad Dog said:

Perhaps we are an anomaly in your "study," Bob, but Steamhead (MY ol' buddy) and I are Psycho about The Steam and DEFINITELY on opposite sides of the barricades! If I had to.guess, Frankie is Feelin' The Bern these days whilst I am in front on the Locamotive of the Trump Express... So, more Libs you guessing are in to The Steam? Mad Dog

Dawg, ya know I love ya, but the only thing I'll say right now is that for the first time in years, I plan to actually watch the two political conventions. I think we will probably see history being made in both of them.

Now back on topic- Steam Rules!

Steve Minnich

Encourage people to vote steam in favor of switching over to forced air.
And in November...just vote. Period. Now more than ever, each vote is critical.

Paul48

And if they don't like the popular vote, they'll use the electoral college to put in whomever they please.

BobC

If the choices don't improve by election day I've decided to go the write in candidate route. It didn't work in '56 maybe it will this time.

BTW haw many of the people can you ID on the back cover?

Bob

Gordy

As Rich would say turds supplied with polishing cloths.....

The Steam Whisperer

I wonder if the original statement is true tendency across the whole population. I know studies were done in the past linking views/ opinions to the brand of car a person tends to buy. IIRC, the most "conservative" people tended to be more likely to buy Fords. My college prof was probably unique... Fords and Alfas. Actually he was very unique...probably 1 in 100,000.

Paul48

It's a sad state of affairs. Without regard to gender, the persons that we put forward as candidates should be the best and brightest the country has to offer. We're left trying to decide who will damage the country less. This reads like the script of a bad comedy.

hvacfreak2

Paul48 said:

It's a sad state of affairs. Without regard to gender, the persons that we put forward as candidates should be the best and brightest the country has to offer. We're left trying to decide who will damage the country less. This reads like the script of a bad comedy.

This is exactly how I feel. I could go on ( and on , and on ) , but man. I look at these candidates and I shake my head and rub my eyes , like waking up with a hangover and trying to figure out what happened the night before.

Paul48

Look at the "cast of characters" we've had as president, for the last 30-40 years. It becomes very clear as to why the country is in the shape it is now. Having the ability to make a career out of being a politician, does not guarantee the intelligence to lead a country.

Gordy

A theoretical physicists point of view. This is an older take when senior was president. Still holds true even more so today.

https://youtu.be/jTxaGzm_v8Q

hot_rod

Who the hell wants the job! Crappy pay, long hours, 1/2 the country and world hate you,etc.
That may be why we get what we get.

Gordy

Commander in chief. Perceived to be the worlds most powerful individual. That's why. Crappy pay for life.

4Johnpipe

Steam or water so long as it requires a hydronic proffesional I'm for it!

BobC

@Gordy A military commander will use all the weapons at his disposal to achieve an objective. After we saw how well the atomic bomb works the generals thought they found an answer to the obscene costs of maintaining and army to engage in conventional war. The problem was the other guys had them within a few years and the MAD doctrine took hold.

Eisenhower's farewell speech warned us the military industrial complex would consume all available resources, he was absolutely correct. Industry is will to build anything the military can imagine (all cost plus) WEATHER OR NOT IT IS FEASIBLE - that is hideously expensive.

We have to stop getting ourselves involved in wars that are not a existential threat to this country, that means no more nation building. Iraq was a stupid mistake made by an administration that had no idea what they were doing. We won all the battles but lost the war. Worse yet we took our eyes off the ball and let Osama escape to spread is poisonous ideology and we have also lost the war in Afghanistan. Now we are in Syria and probably Libya as well - where does it all end?

We can not become isolationist but we have to choose our battles carefully. If we draw a line we have to stand behind that line and destroy anyone that tries to cross it no matter what the cost. Given the stakes we had better be very sure.

Bob

Paul48

"Our desire is to pursue ourselves the path of peace as the only one leading surely to prosperity." --Thomas Jefferson

"Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto." --Thomas Jefferson

Gordy

Commerce should be alliance enough.

Gordy

One really has to go all the way back to the dead men of this nations infancy. All of the suppression they witnessed from the empire they escaped from to start over. All of the thoughts that went into the documents that would lay the groundwork for a great nation. A great nation that would not follow the foot steps of what they escaped. If they were alive today to witness how their blueprints evolved. What changes if any would they make if they could.

DanHolohan

Well, Gordy, I figure many of them would try to bring back slavery. Take away the vote from women. Stuff like that.

Gordy

Funny while writing the post Dan those two very things went through my mind . However I was thinking more in terms of how our governmental system has evolved.

DanHolohan

I got what you meant. Just being historical.

R Mannino

DanHolohan said:

Well, Gordy, I figure many of them would try to bring back slavery. Take away the vote from women. Stuff like that.

But they won't take your gun away from you.

SWEI

Hard to make a call on how they might react to the modern world. What would they think of the Internet and ubiquitous surveillance? Nuclear weapons? Night vision? Phased-array radar and self-aiming artillery?

Gordy

Just theorizing...
Which brings up the second. Having a "well organized militia". The right to bear arms. I'm sure when written they never would have imagined the capacity of which a military entity could become. Cannon being the largest weapon of the time. Along with state national guards, and local law enforcement. To serve, and protect. It becomes a no brainier that IF it came down to calling on citizens to pick up their own arms to help fight tyranny whether foreign, or domestic would become futile.

An argument many gun rights activists cling to.

Steamhead

Orlando..........................

Gordy

Steamhead said:

Orlando..........................

Ahh the self defense argument. The open, or conceal carry individual will always be at the mercy of the element of surprise.

For the nut cases knowing more citizens are armed to protect themselves, and others it may make their attempt more sporting.

I took the cc class just to see what a person had to do to obtain their license here in Illinois once the law was passed. Scary really. Many Rambos. With it comes a whole different level of responsibility verses protecting ones home and property. Most places where you would want to protect yourself it is not lawful to carry. Here in Illinois.

And all someone has to do here that wishes no one to carry in their establishment is put up a no firearms allowed sign. If you chose to carry you would be spending more time securing your firearm than wearing it to go about your daily activities.

Harvey Ramer

I'm anxiously waiting for the day when everyone just gets along. A good start would be for every individual to get their own life in order before they pick on someone else's way of doing things.

Gordy

That would be a wonderful thing @Harvey Ramer .

Sometimes I look to our animal kingdom. Funny how certain species when population density increases they start to turn on themselves. While others live harmoniously. Example being bees, ants, and the like. Working together for the collective.

Gordy

His own brother with him. Apparently oblivious to his intended actions. The element of surprise I was speaking of earlier.......

Solid_Fuel_Man

Futility in such a battle while certainly true, would still be better than a completely helpless slaughter. I'd rather bring a knife to a gunfight, than a fist to a gunfight.

SFM

Larry Weingarten

People look for patterns in life. Its a useful way of making sense of the world. This approach doesn't work well with individual people though. I don't like being cubby-holed and suspect few others, men or women do. It's work, but everyone is an individual and needs to be treated as such. Works for animals too, but that's another discussion

Yours, Larry

jumper

"shall not be abridged" is plainly (and painfully for many) clear. If Americans don't like that they can amend their Constitution. Judges who weasel their way around common English break their oath.

Solid_Fuel_Man

How many nutjobs attack (with guns) a police academy? Or any place with a known armed force? No they go for schools, and other (Orlando) places with masses in close proximity with low to no security. Most likely with very few if any arms.

SFM

Gordy

Solid_Fuel_Man said:

Futility in such a battle while certainly true, would still be better than a completely helpless slaughter. I'd rather bring a knife to a gunfight, than a fist to a gunfight.

SFM

I guess my point is. At what point is tyranny evident enough to bring a group of individuals that personally own firearms to organize themselves, and decide to rise up against 1st tier being law enforcement, with individuals probably knowing one another on both sides. Second tier national guard, and if you make it to the third tier armed forces.

If tyranny of a foreign nature happens to get through the three tiers mentioned in reverse order. I doubt we would get the chance to use firearms let alone knives, or fists to defend our nation.

Paul48

@Dan Holohan
"Well, Gordy, I figure many of them would try to bring back slavery. Take away the vote from women. Stuff like that"

I think that most of the "Founding Fathers" would have the intelligence to have changed with the times. I also think they would be appalled that the government they fought and died to create, has enslaved all of it's citizenry with taxes. I sincerely doubt that voting would have even crossed the minds of the women of the day. The process of voting, in itself, was still a developing process. Keep in mind, the colonists wanted to make George Washington, America's first king.

DanHolohan

Yes, Paul. I get all of that. I read history. They were just human beings. They fought with each other, called each other nasty names, played tough politics. They were just people, like us.

Paul48

I guess I haven't read the newer versions of American history. I still hold them in reverence, in the same way I hold a firefighter that runs into a burning building. Putting everything in perspective, they were heroes.

DanHolohan

Gosh, it's not a new version, Paul. It's American history, warts and all. They were not gods. They were human. They fought with each other. They even had duels and beat each other with canes on the floor of Congress.

Steve Minnich

I love the argument against the idea that the Constitution be a living document because they're against any change yet that's exactly what the Bill of Rights was. Amendment = Change.

Steve Minnich

And then they made changes to the changes.