thebackpacker.com - backpacking, hiking and camping Welcome to thebackpacker.com
create account   login  
     home : trailtalk
    articles  beginners  gear  links  pictures            

RIP Personal Responsibility

View Messages

Viewing posts 51 to 100 of 251 messages posted.
Jump to Page   << prev   |  1   |  2  |  3   |  4   |  5   |  6   |  next >>

To add this thread as a favorites, you need to first login.
 

sacco, talk about truth being stranger than fiction. Here's a nice heartwarming story from my Ohio.”
Nigal
1:09:02 PM



eeek. there's always some azzhole to take the fun out of any joke.

Not nigal, the parant in the news story. LOL
last edited: 2/23/06 1:37:06 PM
sacco
1:34:55 PM
2/23/06

So let me get this straight... "Two parents are suing because they can't stand up to their kids demands" becomes (to Nigal's mind) "Parents are terrible these days"?

What a maroon!
Violin
2:09:35 PM
2/23/06


lyra
2:14:04 PM
2/23/06

I gald to know that Googlefight is helping to solve the worlds problems.

My work here is done.
humanpackmule
2:48:58 PM
2/23/06

Yup, when my kids complained that that they didn't want to do something I told them to do, my answer was "You don't have to want to do it. You just have to do it."
Creek Dancer
2:57:44 PM
2/23/06

Hell, Violin can't even control his dog, much less his kids. Of course he's not going to get this thread.
Nigal
3:02:40 PM
2/23/06

when the hell did cartoon characters selling junk become news? people are stupid
Crash Bang
3:46:37 PM
2/23/06

Oh my goodness! What a bunch of hooey! I know when my parents said no to something, it was no. Apparently, anyone who wants to bring this suit forward either has no spine to control their kids or just wants to make some free money. This suit has no legs.
lipstick hiker
4:20:23 PM
2/23/06

Whenever I hear or read something like this, I'm reminded of one of my dad's favorite stories.........(kids groaning).....he used to work for a company that manufactured wood products. One of the little perks for employees was that they were allowed to bring home the scrap wood for burning. (great stuff: perfectly round white birch logs) Back in the late 70s/early 80s, wood burning was a popular means of energy conservation where I grew up. In my dad's office one day, a secretary was complaining about the high cost of heating her home. When my dad asked why she didn't bring home the free firewood, she replied "I'd like to, but my kids would never haul the wood or pile it." My dad said, "Really? At my house, my kids do what I tell them to do."
Nonconformist
4:31:44 PM
2/23/06

The most disgusting tv shows are the ones that feature really grossly overweight kids where the parents can't tell them no when it comes to snacks and they are under 5 years old! The show will have them on a bed surrounded by Ring Dings and other snacks and the kids are stuffing their faces with everything around them.

The mother's always say they can't tell them no. I watched some of the show and had to turn away. Then there were a rash of shows just like it featuring kids that were so fat they could barely walk. I started to wonder if the white trash parents were force feeding the kids at that point to get a free trip to the state that the studio is in which is most likely NY or CA. Then the parent makes believe the kid isn't fat too! If they admitted to it, it would mean taking responsibility for being an aweful parent.
lipstick hiker
4:52:38 PM
2/23/06

feugo seems to stick to me like a bad elevator fart.

Nigal
10:17:28 AM
2/23/06

"Bad elevator fart?" as opposed to what? A "good evelvator fart?"

It is annoying the way advertisers try to manipulate little kids, but parents can leave the stuff off the shelves and turn the TV off.
pedxing
8:12:52 AM
2/24/06

GET EM ADDICTED TO BACKPACKING...yeah they can whine about all the stuff they can get...but you gotta eventually carry it.
XL400236
8:17:05 AM
2/24/06

"It is annoying the way advertisers try to manipulate little kids,"

I hate beer commercials. The whole “guy” image that the advertisers portray is so fake and insulting.

“I…like…playin’ two hand touch,
Eating way too much,
And….TWINS!”

Give me a fukcing break! It’s almost enough to make me wanna drink wine from a carafe.
Nigal
8:23:50 AM
2/24/06

Nigal, what? You don't decanter your wine before you drink it, you philistine, LMAO!!!
lipstick hiker
3:49:53 PM
2/24/06

Ever notice the "father" or male role model is the idiot. Being a Straight White Conservative Male...is a dying breed....Duke where are you when we need you.
XL400236
3:59:53 PM
2/24/06

Being a Straight White Conservative Male...is a dying breed....

you gotta problem with Gay Black Liberal Females?

because im one.
Crash Bang
4:07:41 PM
2/24/06


LOL..when they came for the smokers I did not stand becuase I was not a smoker.

When they came for Transfat people I did not stand becuase I did not like Transfats.

http://www.slashfood.com/2006/09/27/ny-to-ban-trans-fats/

When they came for people who ___________ I was alone.
Xl400236
3:08:09 PM
10/30/06

Heavens to Megatroid what is wrong with the sheep of the world? I wish they were more like lemmings because at least then they'd bunch up and run off a cliff when there became too many of them.
Nigal
3:39:58 PM
10/30/06

Good for New York!!

Gremlin told me that Canada is banning that crap nation-wide.
Transfats are not really food but an industrial convenience, a food sustitute.
Flies will not land on oleo margarine or Crisco-type shortening because it is not real food.
The same goes for Velveeta and American "cheese".
Those items are labelled, "cheese food product".
These things are polymers or plastics that behave similarly to the real foods that they try to imitate.

Banning these substances is common sense and very responsible since they are a leading cause of heart disease and they cost ALL OF US money.
After all, its your money!

Banning these things is responsible.
Selling/hustling them is irresponsible.

Oh, and its costing us all more for health care.
We are thereby subsidizing the profits of those who make and sell it.
That is not free enterprise, that is a racket.
MarkOTheBeast
5:08:23 PM
10/30/06

Banning these substances is common sense and very responsible since they are a leading cause of heart disease and they cost ALL OF US money.
After all, its your money!

Banning these things is responsible.
Selling/hustling them is irresponsible.

OK, MarkO... the point of this thread is Self-Responsibility.

Do you think we need a Government Program /Law / Mandate to get people to do what is good / healthy for them? Is that the government's job... or... should people exercise some degree of self-responsibility?
wanderer
5:24:26 PM
10/30/06

If we allow one ingredient to be banned what's to stop them from banning another? Say like an ingredient in beer? Like alcohol? Look at all the damage alcohol causes and how much money it costs all of us.

Freedom means taking responsibility for ourselves. If you aren't responsible for yourself and rely on governments then you do not deserve freedom.
Nigal
5:54:25 PM
10/30/06

i love the food vendors that say "0 grams of trans fat" when in reality they have 500mg or less of trans fat per serving...since they round to the nearest gram. this issue has nothing to do with your health or so called personal responsibility. it's all about making money. hell, when your ldl levels go through the roofs it just funds the market for statin drugs. phuck you up and then fix you. i bet they will grease the hinges of your coffin's lids with (or get cremate you in a fire made from) trans fat if you asked.
Jimmy san
5:54:38 PM
10/30/06

Personally, I'd prefer a regulation requiring businesses to post information on the trans fats used. Let people decide whether to eat the crap, let the businesses decide whether the hassle of labeling and the loss of business is worth it.

BTW: KFC decided to stop using trans fats.
Pedxing
6:25:28 PM
10/30/06

Trans fat is made in the lab. Trans fat increases omega 6 fats in humans and decreases Omega 3 fats.

There is nothing wrong with banning a food substance made in a lab that harms humans. Especially when its only "benefit" is a slight increase in flavor.

FDA bans substances all the time. Is that wrong?

No one complains about banning a food coloring that is shown to cause cancer. It's the same thing.
last edited: 10/30/06 6:57:53 PM
bearmagnet
6:56:35 PM
10/30/06

i agree w/ those that think the gov't shouldn't be so quick to ban - but i also agree w/ if the gov't is going to ban something, this should be on that list
fullmoonglob
7:02:59 PM
10/30/06

Good points bear, although some complain about the red dye. As a rule, I'm for expanding information, freedom and choices. I can be persuaded that some bans should happen, but I think we need to be very slow to put bans in place.
Pedxing
7:15:35 PM
10/30/06

Its a practical matter.

Trans fats are costing us money while making money for others........poison for profit, like Tetra Ethyl Lead in gasoline.

The slippery slope idea is nonsense.
The government tried to ban alcohol and the rest is history.

Does anyone want to put tetra ethyl lead back in the gasoline supply and give people a "choice"?

I say we get rid of the crap and move on and quit crying about "loss of personal freedom".
We've got bigger fish to fry.
last edited: 10/30/06 8:14:49 PM
MarkOTheBeast
8:13:38 PM
10/30/06

quit crying about "loss of personal freedom".
We've got bigger fish to fry.


Wow. All I can say is "wow".
fullmoonglob
8:17:32 PM
10/30/06

It's about Natural Selection
Personally, I believe Americans have the right to be stupid. If you want to eat trans fats, ride you motorcycle without a helmet, drive you car without a seat belt, etc, its your right.

Just don't sue or expect anyone else to pay your medical bills.
last edited: 10/30/06 8:35:14 PM
mtnsteve
8:34:19 PM
10/30/06

We are already paying for all the preventable heart disease caused by transfats.

How stupid is that?

Wow. All I can say is "wow".

Maybe because you can't get the concept, Sarge.

I believe people have a right to be stupid too.

As long as their stupidity is costing the stupid, no problem.
But the rest of us don't have to pay for it......unless we enjoy being stupid as well.
MarkOTheBeast
10:06:39 PM
10/30/06

quit crying about "loss of personal freedom".
We've got bigger fish to fry.


just make sure to use pure trans-fat when you fry those fish, mmmmmkay?
Jimmy san
11:01:44 PM
10/30/06

Somebody has a sense of humor!!
MarkOTheBeast
11:32:40 PM
10/30/06

Oh, I get the concept Markus. The concept that YOU don't get is personal freedom IS the big fish to fry.
fullmoonglob
5:24:13 AM
10/31/06

Here's the concept:

The product in question, hydrogenated vegetable oils, is a major cause of heart disease with chronic comsuption.
The cost of treating this problem is coming out of our collective pockets in the form of un-necessarily high health insurance costs.

In a truely free market economy those who produce and sell this "poison" should pay for the damage they cause.
"You break it, you fix it."
Our paying for the damage done is subsidizing the profits of those who make the stuff.

Do you own stock in Crisco?
If so, you are stealing from me.
MarkO
7:03:05 AM
10/31/06

It seems "personal responsibility" is as lost on liberals as "government (and liberal elitists) knows what's best for us" is on me.

This thread really illustrates the stark differences in thought between the liberals/"moderates" and the conservatives/libertarians. It clearly shows who the children are, and who the self-capable people are.
Cujo
7:14:19 AM
10/31/06

MarkO, ok, we can dodge the fact that you think personal freedom is not a big fish to fry.

In a truely free market economy those who produce and sell this "poison" should pay for the damage they cause.

The freeness of the economy is not the same as the freeness of the consumer's legal system. The consumers in OUR legal system are free to sue them. You're taking the guilty until proven innocent approach, and THAT my friend is a scary as your earlier comment.

Happy Halloween.
moonglo
7:17:45 AM
10/31/06

How bout Salt, or say refined Sugar or a dozen other things. I find it hilarious that the same people who want to ban various foods go bananas when the religious folks talk about controlling behavior that spreads AIDS...want to give a quick comparison of the cost of an AIDS patient to a heart patient. And a Heart Patient can change lifestyle and reduce the cost...once they have HIV its pretty much an increasing cost.

Now here is a novel idea, personal responsibility. You get your insurance (if you want) and you choose the items you want covered. If your lifestyle is such that it will cost more...YOU PAY MORE. If you decide not to worry about one type of insurance and the disease hits you...BUMMER DUDE..STBY. Don't ask me or anyone else to bail you out.
Xl400236
7:35:26 AM
10/31/06

What I find funny is the ones crying about personal freedom here - are often the same ones who are happy to wave goodbye to their personal freedom in the name of 'security' in the 'war on terror' or sacrificing their freedom in the name of commerce.

It's ok to listen to spy on people, to lock people up without trial, to carry out a war on drugs, to impose a religion on the government, to allow corporations to hold vast amount of data on their daily lives, to stop gay couples getting married and so on and so on...
- but then when it comes down to taking something potentially very harmful out of food, then suddenly they are all about 'personal freedom'.

Maybe it's just a matter of accepting this is not at all about the all-embracing concepts 'personal freedom' or 'responsibility', but more about just where you choose to draw the lines.
Y2
7:46:20 AM
10/31/06

Well drawn, Y2.
MarkOTheBeast
7:52:13 AM
10/31/06

The "freedom" that is given up is the "freedom" of the terrorists. You left that part out. Of course, not being an American, you don't draw the distinction between terrorists and Americans.
moonglo
7:56:19 AM
10/31/06

Y2 great points until you break down reality

Please give references not the usual screaming meemie accusations.

We can review...FDR in World War II and see about real violations of civil rights...things like American Citizens imprisoned without trial. (not terrorist who by Geneva Convention should have been SHOT when captured). Newspapers shut down, negative reporters shut down...want to go on?
Xl400236
7:56:50 AM
10/31/06

Geez, from artificial grease to WWII........what a nut!
MarkOTheBeast
8:01:10 AM
10/31/06

Infallibly correct as always kYjelly2!
Nigal
8:18:01 AM
10/31/06

kYjelly2...thats cute CA.
mtnsteve
8:30:56 AM
10/31/06

Yet they never challenge my identification of their duplicity when it comes to "free actions" like teenagers they demand "FREEDOM" and "NO CONTROL' right until the natural consequences occur then they want MOMMY to bail them out.
I wonder what the response to Osama Bin Padilla would be if the US government said,"Yep his "rights' were violated." and released him.

Then a couple of weeks later we find what is left of his body, torn apart obviously in a manner that took him hours to die. THe police investigate, find out he was murdered. Arrest the killers...then announce they are letting them free. Apparently (the police would tell us) they violated the killers rights so they are not purusing the case...the Liberal Judges would scream,"WE WANT OUT POUND OF FLESH" the police would calmly explain, "if we don't arrest them you can't try them."
Xl400236
8:34:00 AM
10/31/06

Maybe it's just a matter of accepting this is not at all about the all-embracing concepts 'personal freedom' or 'responsibility', but more about just where you choose to draw the lines.

It's both, actually. While the responsiblity/nanny-state dichotomy may be hyperbole, this is a very concrete example of the liberal mindset reflecting it.
Cujo
8:39:57 AM
10/31/06

Hey here is a more upto date example of how Libbies really don't give a rats patootie about civil rights when they are in charge.

500-700 FBI files accessed by a former bar bouncer who no one could remember hiring. HMMM.. 500 citizens had their secret files public for no reason
Xl400236
8:43:17 AM
10/31/06

LOL @ MountingSteve!
Nigal
8:49:30 AM
10/31/06

Jump to Page   << prev   |  1   |  2  |  3   |  4   |  5   |  6   |  next >>
<< back to Trail Talk main page

 

Post a Message

In order to post a response to this thread you must first be logged in. If you do not already have an account, you must first create a new account.

 

Login Form

Username:
Password:

 

 

Post a New Thread
Search Threads
Browse Archive

Create a New Account

Trail Talk Main Page