Comments for Programmed thought http://programmedthought.wordpress.com That's what they want us to think... Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:09:43 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Dreams by Daniel Silverman http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/2009/04/17/dreams/#comment-18 Daniel Silverman Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:09:43 +0000 http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/?p=41#comment-18 I thought this analysis on HuffPo was pretty right on: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-blankenship/two-reasons-susan-boyle-m_b_187901.html The media is its typical manipulative self, but you've got to love seeing that woman perform and be cheered on. I thought this analysis on HuffPo was pretty right on: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-blankenship/two-reasons-susan-boyle-m_b_187901.html

The media is its typical manipulative self, but you’ve got to love seeing that woman perform and be cheered on.

]]> Comment on Defending a neighbor’s property by Daniel Silverman http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/2008/06/30/defending-a-neighbors-property/#comment-16 Daniel Silverman Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:15:50 +0000 http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/?p=16#comment-16 I thought traditionally shooting someone in the back was a pretty good way to get arrested, because it is very difficult to claim you are in immediate physical danger, and thus it is an unjustifiable homicide. In most cases I can think of, a human life is more valuable than anything the person is likely to be carrying. Shoot a home invader, fine, but don't shoot someone who is retreating and not threatening to you. It is "life, liberty, and property" in that order. Last I checked Texas was part of the South, a land with a tradition on honorable duels. I don't imagine shooting someone in the back as they run away is very honorable. I thought traditionally shooting someone in the back was a pretty good way to get arrested, because it is very difficult to claim you are in immediate physical danger, and thus it is an unjustifiable homicide. In most cases I can think of, a human life is more valuable than anything the person is likely to be carrying. Shoot a home invader, fine, but don’t shoot someone who is retreating and not threatening to you. It is “life, liberty, and property” in that order.

Last I checked Texas was part of the South, a land with a tradition on honorable duels. I don’t imagine shooting someone in the back as they run away is very honorable.

]]> Comment on The government’s feeling of entitlment by rogin16 http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/the-governments-feeling-of-entitlment/#comment-12 rogin16 Wed, 25 Jun 2008 22:56:54 +0000 http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/?p=11#comment-12 I mean that he did not commit a crime by trying to leave the country other than "failing to declare" he was leaving money. Yes he was here illegally but that's completely another crime whose punishment is deportation not seizure of assets (and with which he was not charged). I think he should be punished for being here illegal and be deported but I don't think that warrants seizing his money that he earned. He didn't steal it. He earned it. (But facts are inconvenient aren't they?) I'm pretty sure this statement is wrong: "and continued to break the law by remaining in the United States illegally." He already broke the law; just like when you break into someone's house you break the law, but you don't "continue to break" it by staying there. You already broke the law regardless of how long you stay in the house. Same is true for immigration. If you come here illegally, weather you stay for one day or 2,000 the crime has already been committed. Though I think it's arguable weather or not you remain a "criminal" once you leave because you never hear of illegal immigrants being extradited just to be charged with being here illegally. How can you be a person of facts if half of your drivel is unsupported opinion? "Plus, you can bet that little, if any, taxes were paid on his income, unlike those foolish enough to follow the laws." In fact, according to the <strong>facts</strong> he paid all the taxes on that money that the IRS was due. Given that he was dishwasher, I don't think he earned more than 50k/yr to pay taxes on anyway. You say: "unlike those foolish enough to follow the laws." As far as we know, the only laws he broke is failing to declare and coming here illegally. But hey facts are inconvenient. "And you can also bet that he was using taxpayer money for free health care while he was illegally here and not paying into the tax system." Yeah you can bet, and you'd be in the poor house by now. Absolutely no evidence he owed anyone money or skidded on free health care. If he did, someone would have filed a claim on his seized money. That aside, where are those inconvenient facts to support this wild bet? "Then he wants to send the money out of the country without ever paing (sic) taxes on it." Again facts are really inconvenient for you, aren't they? Given that he wasn't sending the money out but that he was leaving with it to build a new house in his home country and given that he PAID taxes on it as the article and all sources surrounding this affirm. To quote you "Facts are really inconvenient at times, aren’t they?" I mean that he did not commit a crime by trying to leave the country other than “failing to declare” he was leaving money. Yes he was here illegally but that’s completely another crime whose punishment is deportation not seizure of assets (and with which he was not charged). I think he should be punished for being here illegal and be deported but I don’t think that warrants seizing his money that he earned. He didn’t steal it. He earned it. (But facts are inconvenient aren’t they?)

I’m pretty sure this statement is wrong: “and continued to break the law by remaining in the United States illegally.” He already broke the law; just like when you break into someone’s house you break the law, but you don’t “continue to break” it by staying there. You already broke the law regardless of how long you stay in the house. Same is true for immigration. If you come here illegally, weather you stay for one day or 2,000 the crime has already been committed. Though I think it’s arguable weather or not you remain a “criminal” once you leave because you never hear of illegal immigrants being extradited just to be charged with being here illegally.

How can you be a person of facts if half of your drivel is unsupported opinion? “Plus, you can bet that little, if any, taxes were paid on his income, unlike those foolish enough to follow the laws.” In fact, according to the facts he paid all the taxes on that money that the IRS was due. Given that he was dishwasher, I don’t think he earned more than 50k/yr to pay taxes on anyway.

You say: “unlike those foolish enough to follow the laws.” As far as we know, the only laws he broke is failing to declare and coming here illegally. But hey facts are inconvenient.

“And you can also bet that he was using taxpayer money for free health care while he was illegally here and not paying into the tax system.” Yeah you can bet, and you’d be in the poor house by now. Absolutely no evidence he owed anyone money or skidded on free health care. If he did, someone would have filed a claim on his seized money. That aside, where are those inconvenient facts to support this wild bet?

“Then he wants to send the money out of the country without ever paing (sic) taxes on it.” Again facts are really inconvenient for you, aren’t they? Given that he wasn’t sending the money out but that he was leaving with it to build a new house in his home country and given that he PAID taxes on it as the article and all sources surrounding this affirm.

To quote you “Facts are really inconvenient at times, aren’t they?”

]]> Comment on The government’s feeling of entitlment by Jack http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/the-governments-feeling-of-entitlment/#comment-11 Jack Wed, 25 Jun 2008 22:04:04 +0000 http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/?p=11#comment-11 What do you mean, "having committed no crime other than “failing to declare” that he was leaving the country with the money"? He was an illegal immigrant. That means he broke the law by entering the country illegally, and continued to break the law by remaining in the United States illegally. Of course he wasn't familiar with our law of taking money out of the country - he's not an American, he's a criminal, and didn't belong here. Plus, you can bet that little, if any, taxes were paid on his income, unlike those foolish enough to follow the laws. And you can also bet that he was using taxpayer money for free health care while he was illegally here and not paying into the tax system. Then he wants to send the money out of the country without ever paing taxes on it. Facts are really inconvenient at times, aren't they? What do you mean, “having committed no crime other than “failing to declare” that he was leaving the country with the money”? He was an illegal immigrant. That means he broke the law by entering the country illegally, and continued to break the law by remaining in the United States illegally. Of course he wasn’t familiar with our law of taking money out of the country – he’s not an American, he’s a criminal, and didn’t belong here. Plus, you can bet that little, if any, taxes were paid on his income, unlike those foolish enough to follow the laws. And you can also bet that he was using taxpayer money for free health care while he was illegally here and not paying into the tax system. Then he wants to send the money out of the country without ever paing taxes on it. Facts are really inconvenient at times, aren’t they?

]]> Comment on Why start a blog? by rogin16 http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/2008/05/29/why-start-a-blog/#comment-4 rogin16 Fri, 30 May 2008 03:50:34 +0000 http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-4 Thanks :). Thanks :) .

]]> Comment on Why start a blog? by Yifot http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/2008/05/29/why-start-a-blog/#comment-3 Yifot Thu, 29 May 2008 23:25:03 +0000 http://programmedthought.wordpress.com/?p=3#comment-3 I am glad you started a blog. I am glad you started a blog.

]]>