Caterpillar to cut 20,000 jobs
- Thread starter Roadpig
- Start date
mjolnir131
Veteran Expediter
told you it was going to be an ugly week and it's only monday
Last edited:
transporter
Expert Expediter
ok ovm doesnt like obama and has insulted him. but since when is insulting the current president being racist?
In the future anybody who insults any president should be fined $2,000 for being a racist. All Bush and Clinton bashers send payment to feds or else.
In the future anybody who insults any president should be fined $2,000 for being a racist. All Bush and Clinton bashers send payment to feds or else.
Are you serious? You can be critical of the president without using racist slurs. Porch monkey?
Come on now, you can't be serious.
It's not racist because he's being critical of the president. It's racist because he called the president a porch monkey.
The term Porch Monkey is, by and large, a rather innocuous term, and is not in and of itself a racial epithet. It's racist, only if you want it to be. The term originated, and is still used, in Africa to refer to wild monkeys that are virtual pets (or pests, depending on your point of view) who are in the habit of hanging around on porches looking for handouts of scraps of food. After a while, a familiarity grows and they tend to be gentle and docile side and are more interested in eating, interacting, and hanging out with the humans who live there. That's literally where term "trained porch monkey" comes from.
In many parts of the world the term has no meaning, other than the literal meaning above. In some places, like in the US, the term is often applied to lazy Welfare recipients, both black and white, who tend to hang out on the porch instead of going out and finding a job.
If you apply the term in a racist manner, then it's racist. If you apply the term to someone who is quite obviously not a porch monkey, then calling it a racist remark is a stretch. I can see a connection between Obama, Socialism and the Porch Monkey mentality, but for the most part applying the term to Obama is just plain misplaced. Unless, of course, you think that the term "monkey" can only be used in a racially degrading manner, and any time the word "monkey" is used in any way, shape or form in connection with a black man, it's racist.
How many of you remember the Water Buffalo Incident at Penn? (that's rhetorical, you don't need to answer individually). There was a group of students, mostly sorority sisters, outside of a dorm being loud and creating a disturbance. One student yelled out of his window, "Shut up you water buffalo!" He was charged with violating Penn's racial harassment policy of the school's Code of Conduct. They said the term "water buffalo" could be interpreted as a racial slur, "because water buffalo is a dark, primitive animal that lives in Africa."
This is the University of Pennsylvania we're talking about here. A university. A place of higher learning. A place that thinks a well-evolved mammal is a primitive animal. A place that thinks water buffalo live in Africa. (Water buffalo live in Asia, not Africa.)
The school offered a settlement that required him to admit to violating the racial harassment policy, attend racial sensitivity training, accept dorm probation, and accept a guilty mark on his record. The student refused, and after more press than the University would have liked, the charges were eventually dropped. Free Speech wins a narrow victory.
I point all this out to encourage people to not allow the Language Police to use Political Correctness to squash your very thoughts. Let's not be too quick to jerk a knee, as perceived racism and actual racism are two very different things. Howard Cosell found that out 25 years ago, and in many ways things have only gotten worse.
If we're not careful, we'll all just end being a bunch of dancing monkeys.
In many parts of the world the term has no meaning, other than the literal meaning above. In some places, like in the US, the term is often applied to lazy Welfare recipients, both black and white, who tend to hang out on the porch instead of going out and finding a job.
If you apply the term in a racist manner, then it's racist. If you apply the term to someone who is quite obviously not a porch monkey, then calling it a racist remark is a stretch. I can see a connection between Obama, Socialism and the Porch Monkey mentality, but for the most part applying the term to Obama is just plain misplaced. Unless, of course, you think that the term "monkey" can only be used in a racially degrading manner, and any time the word "monkey" is used in any way, shape or form in connection with a black man, it's racist.
How many of you remember the Water Buffalo Incident at Penn? (that's rhetorical, you don't need to answer individually). There was a group of students, mostly sorority sisters, outside of a dorm being loud and creating a disturbance. One student yelled out of his window, "Shut up you water buffalo!" He was charged with violating Penn's racial harassment policy of the school's Code of Conduct. They said the term "water buffalo" could be interpreted as a racial slur, "because water buffalo is a dark, primitive animal that lives in Africa."
This is the University of Pennsylvania we're talking about here. A university. A place of higher learning. A place that thinks a well-evolved mammal is a primitive animal. A place that thinks water buffalo live in Africa. (Water buffalo live in Asia, not Africa.)
The school offered a settlement that required him to admit to violating the racial harassment policy, attend racial sensitivity training, accept dorm probation, and accept a guilty mark on his record. The student refused, and after more press than the University would have liked, the charges were eventually dropped. Free Speech wins a narrow victory.
I point all this out to encourage people to not allow the Language Police to use Political Correctness to squash your very thoughts. Let's not be too quick to jerk a knee, as perceived racism and actual racism are two very different things. Howard Cosell found that out 25 years ago, and in many ways things have only gotten worse.
If we're not careful, we'll all just end being a bunch of dancing monkeys.
transporter
Expert Expediter
roadpig i am serious. ovm aimed his insult at one man. A racist insults a whole ethnic group. I would have preferd ovm not have insulted president Obama. In these tring times we need to get this economy back on track. An no i am not a democrat.
This thread seems to have a lot of topics. Companies paying off workers, inept stock analysts who routinely mis the mark more than do weathermen, trained seals, California CARBs, bums, the questioning of patriotism, personal renouncing their citizenship, ignorant racism, intelligent racism, gays, and ad announcing TriState's increased truck availability, the law firm of Caterpillar Eaton and Cummins, double standards, geography, zoology, civics and etymology.
Ignorant truckers, the lot of ya.
Ignorant truckers, the lot of ya.
transporter
Expert Expediter
some people like and occasional pot luck stew.
chefdennis
Veteran Expediter
turtle wrote:
Hey now!! I ressemble that remark!
Hey now!! I ressemble that remark!
Wow.
Although I've been a member of the board here for a short time, I am dumbfounded over the ignorant comments made in this thread.
I have no tolerance for racism, either. Don't care what your intent was. Your statements were painting with a broad brush, were inappropriate, and extremely unprofessional.
To the poster who stated that he would pray Obama fails: Why in the hell would you do that? If you're an American, why on God's green earth would you pray that your nation's leader would fail? I voted for Bush in his first term, grew to despise him, but never, for one second, thought of him anything but my president. Failure was never an option or thought. Shame on you. The man's been in office for 6 days, and in this thread he has been labeled a porch monkey, a criminal, and prayed for failure. Why would you mix God with hateful thoughts?
To the poster who stated that Obama is owned by someone: Name me one recent (last 40 years or so) president that doesn't have huge IOU's to pay on? Personally, I think the agriculture business has Obama in their pocket (How does a black guy beat a white woman in IOWA? See Farm Bureau, ethanol lobby, etc.
Regarding government bailouts, etc.: Please remember that doling out huge wads of cash began on Bush's watch. Do I blame Bush? No. Should you blame Obama? No. Do you have ideas for solidifying our banking system (no matter how flawed) or stimulating our economy? I'm all ears.
Lastly, I have read a common theme on this and other trucking boards about government (state and federal) moves to increase fuel economy standards and clean air rules as a deliberate attempt to pierce a dagger through the heart of the American Trucker. Why does everyone feel this way? Let's agree to disagree that global warming is occurring or not. What about smog? What about people who live in cities who have a hard time breathing? What about the costs of the oil we import, or it's declining availability? Why is change such an awful thing? Do any of you spend time researching things that could possibly make your modes of employment more efficient, more clean, cheaper, and make engines last longer? Or maybe something that can be produced over and over again without harming our planet? Any among you spend time or money looking into algae diesel? That's my bet for our future.
Or maybe I'm just a tree hugger.
At any rate, please be professional. This forum is open to everyone surfing the web. WE are better than this thread portrayed us. I'm brand-spanking new, but I know that we're not putting our best foot forward here.
Although I've been a member of the board here for a short time, I am dumbfounded over the ignorant comments made in this thread.
I have no tolerance for racism, either. Don't care what your intent was. Your statements were painting with a broad brush, were inappropriate, and extremely unprofessional.
To the poster who stated that he would pray Obama fails: Why in the hell would you do that? If you're an American, why on God's green earth would you pray that your nation's leader would fail? I voted for Bush in his first term, grew to despise him, but never, for one second, thought of him anything but my president. Failure was never an option or thought. Shame on you. The man's been in office for 6 days, and in this thread he has been labeled a porch monkey, a criminal, and prayed for failure. Why would you mix God with hateful thoughts?
To the poster who stated that Obama is owned by someone: Name me one recent (last 40 years or so) president that doesn't have huge IOU's to pay on? Personally, I think the agriculture business has Obama in their pocket (How does a black guy beat a white woman in IOWA? See Farm Bureau, ethanol lobby, etc.
Regarding government bailouts, etc.: Please remember that doling out huge wads of cash began on Bush's watch. Do I blame Bush? No. Should you blame Obama? No. Do you have ideas for solidifying our banking system (no matter how flawed) or stimulating our economy? I'm all ears.
Lastly, I have read a common theme on this and other trucking boards about government (state and federal) moves to increase fuel economy standards and clean air rules as a deliberate attempt to pierce a dagger through the heart of the American Trucker. Why does everyone feel this way? Let's agree to disagree that global warming is occurring or not. What about smog? What about people who live in cities who have a hard time breathing? What about the costs of the oil we import, or it's declining availability? Why is change such an awful thing? Do any of you spend time researching things that could possibly make your modes of employment more efficient, more clean, cheaper, and make engines last longer? Or maybe something that can be produced over and over again without harming our planet? Any among you spend time or money looking into algae diesel? That's my bet for our future.
Or maybe I'm just a tree hugger.
At any rate, please be professional. This forum is open to everyone surfing the web. WE are better than this thread portrayed us. I'm brand-spanking new, but I know that we're not putting our best foot forward here.
jaminjim
Veteran Expediter
Lastly, I have read a common theme on this and other trucking boards about government (state and federal) moves to increase fuel economy standards and clean air rules as a deliberate attempt to pierce a dagger through the heart of the American Trucker. Why does everyone feel this way? Let's agree to disagree that global warming is occurring or not. What about smog? What about people who live in cities who have a hard time breathing? What about the costs of the oil we import, or it's declining availability? Why is change such an awful thing? Do any of you spend time researching things that could possibly make your modes of employment more efficient, more clean, cheaper, and make engines last longer? Or maybe something that can be produced over and over again without harming our planet? Any among you spend time or money looking into algae diesel? That's my bet for our future.
I would suggest that you do some more research on the subject before you do anymore commenting on it. Each of us would like to run with less cost per mile, pollute the air a little bit less. Have you done anything lately to improve the fuel economy, cut the emissions. Can you tell us the amount of money that you have spent to improve these things, and if the rates have gone up for you to help pay for these improvements. I along with many other truckers would love to hear your story.
As far as the name calling, are you annoyed because it took you over four years to formulate your opinion of President Bush. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with Obama's policies, and hope that he fails at most of them.
I would suggest that you do some more research on the subject before you do anymore commenting on it. Each of us would like to run with less cost per mile, pollute the air a little bit less. Have you done anything lately to improve the fuel economy, cut the emissions. Can you tell us the amount of money that you have spent to improve these things, and if the rates have gone up for you to help pay for these improvements. I along with many other truckers would love to hear your story.
As far as the name calling, are you annoyed because it took you over four years to formulate your opinion of President Bush. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with Obama's policies, and hope that he fails at most of them.
hey I fessed up. but some keep making an issue of it....
I have to speak up for the Van Man on this one, because in the years I've been observing and throwing in an occasional comment he's never posted a single racist comment that I've seen. As alluded to in Turtle's earlier post, I would imagine the term "porch monkey" has a different connotation for a Canadian native living in South Dakota than it would for those of us that live south of the Mason-Dixon line. If I hear somebody from Dothan, AL use it I know exactly what he means; I think we should give Van Man the benefit of the doubt.
Seems like there's some general confusion between wanting Obama to fail in instituting his liberal, socialist policies that we conservatives deem to be detrimental to the country, as opposed to wanting the country to fail. There are some of us that are concerned our economic and social freedoms will fail if his policies succeed.
Interesting - you grew to despise (personally hate?) Bush rather than just strongly disagree with his policies? This is typical of the liberal hatred that has been displayed toward Bush since before the FL recount was over in 2000. He's been called a criminal and everything other derogatory slur imagineable by liberals and Democrats everywhere for the past eight years,and now there's a sudden standard of "fairness and sensitivity" that we Republicans are supposed to display toward the new resident of the Oval Office. I see nothing hateful with calling on the Deity to save us from socialism.
Do you understand the costs that will result in allowing states to set their own emission standards? Suppose all the car and truck manufacturers have to produce special engines just for California? To compound the issue, throw in a couple other large population states like IL and OH, and all three with different standards. It would take too much space to elaborate on all the financial consequences here, but suffice to say it would be a nightmare scenario.
I think most everybody IS professional on this forum. We may not always use the spell-check like we should, and we may not read like a college professors' chat room; however, the discussions are lively, the opinions diverse and well-intentioned, and the participants are pretty knowledgeable about politics in general and transportation in particular. Welcome aboard, and I hope your trip is an interesting one.
Robert Reich, an Obama economic adviser says white males should not get these "stimulus" jobs and I'm suppose to support those policies?
That's a misconception that needs to be cleared up quickly. The press, automakers and others will try to muddy the waters as best they can. The Clean Air Act grants California, and only California, the authority to separately regulate vehicle pollution in the state because it started monitoring such pollution before the federal government got into the act. However, a waiver is still required. In the past, dozens of times over the last 40 years, the EPA has granted any waivers that California has applied for. For this one, Bush directed the EPA to deny it, and Obama has directed the EPA to reconsider (not to order them to grant it, but to reconsider, which, of course, means they'll grant it).
The waiver would grant California the authority to move up the federal timetable for emissions by 4 years. The California law, which was originally meant to take effect in the 2009 model year, requires automakers to cut emissions by nearly a third (30%) by 2016, four years ahead of the federal timetable. The result would be an increase in fuel efficiency in the American car and light truck fleet to roughly 35 miles per gallon from the current average of 27.
There are 13 other states that want waivers, too, but that does not mean 13 different standards, as automaker are trying to imply. The Clean Air Act allows for California to obtain a waiver, and if the waiver is granted, it allows other states to adopt either the federal standard, or the California standard, but not one of their own.
The automakers argue that they'll have to produce different cars and trucks for California. Well, they already do that. Cars sold in California already have a different emissions standard that non-California cars. They argue that if other states adopt the California standard that they'll have states outside of the waivers being forced to sell fewer large trucks and SUV's in order to meet overall emissions and fuel economy figures.
Poor babies. They've had 40 years of real time to increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions, and they've dragged their feet. The automakers argue that there should be one nationwide standard for emissions and fuel efficiency. Instead of making one set of cars for California and the 13 other states, and then one set for everybody else, they could just make the one set for California and sell them everywhere, which would in effect put into place a single nationwide standard. But that would mean they'll have to achieve real, actual reductions in emissions and real, actual increases in fuel efficiency, individually and across the board, everywhere. Oh, the horror.
They won't be able to rob Peter to pay Paul in their MPG and Co2 Ponzi game anymore. The California waiver won't give them time to get enough hybrids into the market to make an overall impact on the MPG and emissions numbers. The California waiver will make it so that the emissions from any individual given car or truck must have a 30% reduction in emissions over the same vehicle made today, and not just in aggregate numbers helped by hybrids.
It means that after the 40 years of dedicated research the automakers have claimed to have done on fuel efficiency and exhaust emissions, it's put up or shut up time. They've talked the talk, let's see if they can walk the walk.
Over the last 100 years, look at the advances in telecommunications, aviation, electronics, materials, biology, medicine, astronomy, agriculture, genetics, you name it. Except the American automobile, which, until now, has set the world standard. Look at the average MPG of the Ford Model T as compared to the Ford Explorer. The auto industry needs, and deserves, the good swift kick in the butt that they're getting right now.