REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Ship in a bottle

POSTED BY: DREAMTROVE
UPDATED: Wednesday, July 3, 2024 07:57
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 2319
PAGE 1 of 1

Thursday, December 11, 2008 6:43 PM

DREAMTROVE


Quote:

Chrisisall:
Starting a whole post just to target & make fun of a single person is just WRONG!!!!



I take it this is sarcasm, but I agree.

Several things seem wrong. I leave for a few decades and come back and everyone is still at each other's throats about partisan minutiae while the titanic sinks.

It seems that this is a communication misfire, a malfuction of the human genome, or a singularity that initiates the collapse of society, or perhaps human evolution.

Some people are definitely instigators, but can't we all just get along? I mean screw who killed who. Let's move on. Enough with the personal attacks.

This, BTW, is why I left before, and I did it very loudly. Someone started a thread for the purpose of attacking Pirate News, and a lot of people like six year olds on a playground, piled on.

If people want to beat down a disabled vet to prevent him from saying his piece about the corruption of our system, even if some of it loud boisterous, at times obnoxious and offensive to some, then who the hell are we anyway?

I mean, consider the whole plot concept of the show, and the shows, all within a spectrum of what we are collectively fans of:

Firefly. Let's extend. Whedonesque: so, Buffy, Angel, movies if they count. All with a very heavy libertarian to anarchist theme.

Next, space western, Cowboy Bebop, Outlaw Star, etc.

Okay, now, broader spectrum, sci-fi noir, anime.

All of this is a focus on disparate political world views that share a singular social view:

The people in power are not your friends. Your destiny is up to you, and you have to make the best judgment on your own survival, and the best course for humanity.

I mean, how many people here sided with the replicants at least to some extent in either bladerunner or do androids dream of electric sheep?

Now, how many people thought that Star Wars was the pinnacle of intellectual discourse? I'm not saying it sucked. It was entertaining. So was Star Trek. But this isn't a Star Trek world. If being a firefly fan says anything about anyone, it says the opposite of what Star Trek presents (with a few episodice exceptions): A world in which the people in power are looking after everyone's best interests, and if only we could spread their influence across the universe, everything would be just peachy.

That's not the world view of Firefly, or anything like it, you don't find it in Farscape, and you don't find it anything I just mentioned.

So, not to say that auraptor is wrong, sometimes he's right, more often than I care to admit. Sure, it's not because I disagree with his perspective so much as his presentation, which sure, maybe be a mental quirk. But we all do it, and we do it too much.

We should be able to have a civil discussion about our united view against the alliance view, and I don't think that those voices on the forum support the alliance view. They represents it sometimes. But I think that like the rest of us, correct me if I'm wrong, they think that govt. is out of control, and the alliance is basically evil.

If I were to try to step into those shoes, and take what I might call an anti-islamic stance, which I would take to be an anti-faith stance, and sure, is counter to my nature, I could see where Islamic terrorists to some people are reavers. I have a friend who said he was shot in the head twice by some freaks who hadn't even read he koran, and just took some shmuck's word for it on what it said and meant.

But come on, it's not like Christianity and Judaism don't have thousands of years of history of doing exactly the same thing.

Reavers, people, are not muslims, even if some muslims are reavers. But this is just the sort of point we ought to be able to debate, as a single group, with wildly disparate views on the world, but still, a shared vision of how the world works, what constitutes evil, and how the world should work, and I assume that no one here is stupid, so we all saw the same show, and that a world determined by the individual liberty and the good will of the human race is far superior to one controlled by an unaccountable elite with an impenetrable fortress designing a future for everyone.

From a distance, I come back in and see the same pitbull fighting that usurps our time and puts us at each other's throats which can only serve on end, to aid our real ideological.

And sure. Nitpick my interpretation of the show's world view, or Joss', or the genre's, but can I get at least a hell yeah to some of this?




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 11, 2008 7:22 PM

DREAMTROVE


Bump

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, December 11, 2008 8:55 PM

THATWEIRDGIRL


Heck yeah?

It does bother me how quickly we turn to calling certain people out to the yard for a showdown. It upsets me when someone says, "How stupid do you have to be to believe the opposite of what I believe?" I don't want to get into that sort of thing. Not cool. I like it here because there are many intelligent people discussing interesting things. Yay for expression!

---
Sometimes I lie awake at night, and I ask, "Where have I gone wrong?" Then a voice says to me, "This is going to take more than one night."
-- Charlie Brown
www.thatcostumegirl.com
www.thatweirdgirl.com

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 6:09 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


"How stupid do you have to be to believe the opposite of what I believe?"

If that's all there was I'd agree. People arguing about things for which there is no proof, and never will be - now that is just stupid. But some people (not Rap) are bringing facts to the discussion. Nothing stupid in that.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 6:39 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
can I get at least a hell yeah to some of this?




I'll toss in a Heck Yeah! as well.
Look, JewelStaiteFan, RiverLove, Finn- these peeps give good solid arguments for their beliefs- they are integral parts of this board. AU is an excellent addition to the entertainment side, but at RWED he is little better than a troll, twisting facts like pretzels and then claiming unerring perception.... sorry, but that's MO.


The hecking Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 6:52 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Its always like this. 2 sides firmly entrenched in their belief structures, unable AND unwilling see the other side.

And NEVER open to the FACT that there are more than their 2 viewpoint/sides.

Its depressing to those of us who have far and away stranger/different/deeper experiences than those which will fit into their little boxes.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 7:03 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


Wulf

What I see here is that most people psychologicaly never get past their youth. It's sad. To live all those extra decades and be doomed to repeat the same ideas over and over till you get old and die.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 7:06 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Its always like this. 2 sides firmly entrenched in their belief structures, unable AND unwilling see the other side.


When dealing with real vs. perceived absolutes, it can be no different.
When one perceives one's beliefs to be infallible, that's pretty much all she wrote.
When one denies or distorts the truth of facts, the ramparts go up.

Simplicity should be employed, but that would lead to concession, and most can't/won't have it.


The realistic Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 7:21 AM

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN


This thread is much like Jerry Maguire's mission statement project. I'm glad someone had the moxy to set it out there.

As a Libertarian I often read the partisan bickering and just wag my head and sigh. Often I'm struck with how one person will argue an issue and get it half right, then be rebutted with his/her opponent who has the other half right. Then I mentally take the correct portion from the right...the correct portion from the left...and piece them together to present the answer nobody sees, and then be ignored by both as my solution does not fit an accepted ideoligical viewpoint.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 7:33 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg


Amen

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 7:40 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!


BSCM

I'm really not in favor of the half of this + half of that = truth approach. Often the truth is all of something.

I'm reminded of a post SignyM made two years or so ago. It had to do with testing your understanding (model) by making predictions. If your predictions are accurate, you can have more confidence that you are focusing on the important factors and drawing correct conclusions. If you cannot predict accurately, then you have errors you need to fix.

This economic mess ? Many of us supposed 'partisan' people were predicting it, not b/c of beliefs but based on the facts: that Bush was running the government into the ground; and that gap between the rich and everyone else (whose demand is the real driver of an economy) was widening.

Iraq ? Many of us supposed 'partisan' people were saying it was no threat, there were no WMDs, and it would be a difficult outcome. This was not based on any hatred, but on reading the reports, watching the gap between what Bush was saying and what he was doing, and crediting the experts with more expertise than the flaks.


Dismissing an opinion or position just b/c it's on 'one side' is a serious mistake. You need to be looking at who makes the better predictions. If you are not, then you're just drawing fact-free partisan conclusions of your own.


***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 7:44 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
Often I'm struck with how one person will argue an issue and get it half right, then be rebutted with his/her opponent who has the other half right.

Yeah, I do see that a bit.
I find that when I let peeps know I agree with some portion of what they say, more often than not they roll thru as if they've won the argument, not takin' in to account that I was trying to get to an understanding, not necessarily 'win'.

It's not easy in the middle, is it Blue?


The balancing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 7:48 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:

I'm really not in favor of the half of this + half of that approach = truth. Often the truth is all of something.


Yes, that's true also IMO. Like torture- it's just wrong, and so-called good guys usin' it don't make it right. There are some absolutes, problem comes when absolutes are ALL one deals in.


The absolutely Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 8:17 AM

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by rue:
BSCM
I'm really not in favor of the half of this + half of that approach = truth. Often the truth is all of something.



I'm not saying that it's a perfect model, but when I say "I often feel", that's exactly what I mean. I always look at the big picture, or rather the biggest picture I can when it comes to politics. I concern myself with:
The Constitution
Fundemental Rights of individuals
Fundemental Rights of States

What I abhore are arguements over political minutiae and how supposed "intellectual" posters would toss aside, or argue against large scale rights to statisify some particular perceved wrong. The thread "Sore Losers Dance" is a supreme example, where California's right to self-govern is trumped by a special intrest on a singular heated issue, prop 8. No thought is given to the impact on 49 other states. No thought is given to the "unintended consequences" of certain actions. Does anyone here even know about the growing movement in Texas to secede? Does anyone even care? Doubtful.

Rue, the general statement from all my libertarian friends is a wish that the Red-Blue partisians would come to understand and accept as truth the freedoms their opposition espouses.

--That "Blue" partisians would come to grips with the solid fact that economic freedom promotes prosperity.
--That "Red" partisians would freaking stop trying to impose a moral code on individuals and come to grips with another solid fact, that people know best how to govern themselves.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 8:23 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:

--That "Blue" partisians would come to grips with the solid fact that economic freedom promotes prosperity.
--That "Red" partisians would freaking stop trying to impose a moral code on individuals and come to grips with another solid fact, that people know best how to govern themselves.


I can hover with those, in general.

However, in the former, some restrictions must apply, and in the latter, not always, due in part to lack of time and/or intelligent curiosity.


The qualifying Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 8:50 AM

COZEN


Y'all crack me up. Though entertaining during my slow moments.

When in power, the point is to maintain, better yet, increase one's power over the commonpeeps. Symbiotically linked with the need to maintain power is following and controlling the money. What's so hard to comprehend?

There are renters and there are owners. The dynamic between the two is where the tensions occur. Make your peace with where you fall in that scenario, or fight for wealth, or fight against those who control wealth.

I've made my peace, due, at a best guess, to geographical circumstance. Easier for me and mine to live a good life here in the northern reaches of North America. So, lucky me. Trite as it may sound, ya can't save everyone, so you might as well save yourself and those you love, as best you can.

Kinda explains my reasoning for not wasting my time arguing here.

***
Oh, wait, ironic conundrum.




NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 9:17 AM

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN


Quote:

Originally posted by cozen:
When in power, the point is to maintain, better yet, increase one's power over the commonpeeps.



Ya know, I'm really really glad this was posted. It hurts because it's true. Cozen makes a point I long ago came to grips with, and have been fighting my way up through the american lifestyle as a result. But what this bleak outlook doesn't perceve, is another direction. "up" as opposed to left-right, forward-back when you live in flatland. There is in fact a book written that addresses this very issue called "A more perfect constitution" by Larry Sabato. You can purchase a copy on amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/More-Perfect-Constitution-Proposals-Revitalize/d
p/0802716210


I've read this book cover to cover and the main focus is how to go about fixing the problems in the document to truely Form A More Perfect Union.

What's most interesting is that he lays out about 40 solutions to perfecting our union in the book (and makes awsome cases for each one) then conducts a Zogby poll and the result is that over and over an overwhelming population of americans disagree with him. By whopping margins of 80/20 or 90/10. But once you read the book, you wonder why. And the answer is that the overwhelming majority of people are not qualified to think honestly about their governance. They are either 1. Apathetic 2. Pre-programed by idology or 3. Part of the established power-stucture and thus oppose change.

Our founders forsaw that the document they created would not last unless they built in 2 ways to change it. We know well the 1st, to write an amendment. But hardly anyone knows the second. Call a new Constitutional Convention. If a majority of states call for a convention, one must be held. This is where the fundemental text of the document can be changed.

It will never happen. Ever. And in the book he makes a solid case that it must else these united states will slide into the cracks of history.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 9:20 AM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
he makes a solid case that it must else these united states will slide into the cracks of history.


Aren't we slidin' now?


The questioning Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 11:15 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Well, for my part I have an agenda, and am not shy in admitting that nor pursuing it - yet not at someone else's expense cause putting an end to that crap is a big part of it.

Thing is, I welcome alternative viewpoints, the more windows you have on a subject, the clearer the picture, yes ?

It's when folk start smearing mud (Re: Lies) on those windows that'll start me on a rampage, or when someone starts using their own free will to impinge on or deny that of someone else.

I also tend to give as I get - whereas some will get a polite and reasoned argument, others will recieve a verbal conflagaration, or mockery.

No sense pretending party politics, I only got one side in an issue - MINE.

And above all else, I ain't afraid of admittin that.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Friday, December 12, 2008 6:32 PM

DREAMTROVE


Sorry, this is long. If I have time, I'll edit it. If you have time, read through and see if we can reach a path for future furtive discussion.

Whoa, this is a lot to digest. I'm glad this got such a response, you'll pardon me if I ignore the other threads for the moment, time constraints.
I'm just going to play casual observer here, and make some comments, I think everyone mostly has the idea, and I see some people actually starting to do it here, and I want to focus on this, and let the bickering fall by the wayside.

Quote:


THATWEIRDGIRL
Heck yeah?
It does bother me how quickly we turn to calling certain people out to the yard for a showdown. It upsets me when someone says, "How stupid do you have to be to believe the opposite of what I believe?" I don't want to get into that sort of thing. Not cool. I like it here because there are many intelligent people discussing interesting things. Yay for expression!



Always worth points when you bring the lurkers out.
If ten equal men combine their might, five pushing one way, and ten pushing the other, they accomplish nothing. we've all seen way too much of that here.
We disagree on certain points, let's accept that and move on
Thanks

Quote:

RUE

If that's all there was I'd agree. People arguing about things for which there is no proof, and never will be - now that is just stupid. But some people (not Rap) are bringing facts to the discussion. Nothing stupid in that.



Auraptor comes in for a lot of abuse, as does Pirate News. Let's try not to pull in personal attacks. I think that at times, a lot of members have posted informational pieces or partisan arguments with little factual basis. When they do, they are wasting everyone's time. I would suggest to everyone that you become your own editor and ask if you are doing this. About 20% of the time I think Auraptor has a point. I suspect that he has a point a higher % of the time than that, but that he spends too much time arguing. He is not alone.

Some of the things he says are insightful.

If any of us revisit old dead issues like WMDs, etc. from any angle, we're wasting everyone's time. In a firefly world, this would be like arguing for the existance or non-existance of either Reavers or Blue Sun.

If we take an example of what I would consider a pointless argument, let me stall for a moment and say a lot of nothing about WMDs:

1. We all know there were WMDs, and that they weren't found in Iraq. Why? Lots of possible explanations, but they are all irrelevant. Tyrannies often have them. The US and other powers, Russia, China, often supply them, to help keep their own puppets in power. IMHO.

2. No reason for war is ever the reason for war. We didn't go to war with Japan over Pearl Harbor, we attacked Japan in 1937. And continued to do so. It's not a theory, it's an established fact that Pearl Harbor was a retaliation for an attack on the Japanese fleet earlier that morning. The "reason for war" is always BS. The reason for war is greed, imperialism, etc. Always. And not just on our side. On the other side as well. Iraq could have avoided this war also. There was a lot of greed and stupidity and stubbornness, and plenty to go around. A lot of WMDs to go around also.

3. Who cares? I mean, does anyone on this forum have WMDs? Are you planning to get some? Sell them on ebay? Do you get into fights with people who have them? We're not starting wars, and most of us if not all have some problem with these wars we are in and how they were conducted. This is probably because the people in power are people not like us. We shouldn't get into these discussions defending Bush or Obama or anyone in the power structure because frankly, they're not worth the time. They're not worth your time.

Quote:


CHRISISALL
I'll toss in a Heck Yeah! as well.
Look, JewelStaiteFan, RiverLove, Finn- these peeps give good solid arguments for their beliefs- they are integral parts of this board. AU is an excellent addition to the entertainment side, but at RWED he is little better than a troll, twisting facts like pretzels and then claiming unerring perception.... sorry, but that's MO.



Thanks. I want to take a couple points out.

1. I think Auraptor feels cornered, and gets into a lot of arguments based on opinion posing as fact because he doesn't want to see the blues beat the reds. I think that there are a lot of people in that position, but the reds are doing it more now because they are in the minority. Myself, I'm sort of St. Charles Place, a little more red than blue. But these twisted facts are just props to support an ideological position under attack. We shouldn't be having this infighting at all. If auraptor posts something that is factually incorrect, skip it, don't respond, or at least, don't get into it. And the same for everyone else. If auraptor or anyone else posts something insightful, then we should carry the discussion forward. I think if I take an hour here I can find at least half a dozen insightful posts by auraptor posted since my recent sign on. Let those contribute to the conversation, and not put his back against the wall to defend a positions with which many of us disagree.

I opened by attacking his statements about stem cell research. I didn't intend to start an argument, but I follow the field closely, and the advances are of personal importance to me, and I have a strong science background. Try not to post facts you're not sure of, but if someone else does, try to keep it short and not incite fighting. I should have said something simpler. Like

"Actually, there have been a lot of advances in embryonic stem cell research, particularly in bone disorders. True, non emryonic stem cells are also useful, and have led to diabetes treatments. I have type two diabetes. My sister has neurofibromatosis. Her condition is a lot more critical than mine. It's a point of information with personal implications."

Or something like that. I believe what I actually said was "Auraptor, you're a moron" because that's how his take on stem cell research read to me. But it wasn't a constructive thing to say. We should be a team, even a team that disagrees, and more importantly, a team that allows itself to disagree.

Think of it this way: Would Zoe, Book, Simon and Jayne fall into lockstep on every issue? Of course not. Is River totally insane? Of course. But River is arguably the most essential member of the team. So, is Pirate News insane? Yeah, sure, I think he'd accept that. But we never know. I said before that I was the Jayne Cobb, but maybe I'm the Simon, and Auraptor is the Jayne. It doesn't matter. The point is, we have things in common that bring us together and those things are special and unique, differing from the morass of human stupidity. We have petty points which break us apart, and those are not unique, they are the same petty points that break the rest of America apart. Some of them I'd go so far as to say they were put there to tear us apart.

Quote:


WULFENSTAR

Its always like this. 2 sides firmly entrenched in their belief structures, unable AND unwilling see the other side.
And NEVER open to the FACT that there are more than their 2 viewpoint/sides.
Its depressing to those of us who have far and away stranger/different/deeper experiences than those which will fit into their little boxes.



So very true. And I'm pretty solidly outside the box, esp. lately, but even if some can't see passed their left right box, they still have something to contribute. I think to stop the petty squabbling we need to not only stop attacking those who disagree with us, but also stop defending with such vigor.

For instance, if I were a pro-bush global militarist, it would be much better for me to say so. Screw the arguments for the war and the various associated policies, I think it would make much more sense to say, and this isn't my position, but it's one I think might make more sense for a bush supporter:
"I support the action. I think it was a strategically correct move for the US to overthrow Iraq and establish a democracy. While I'm not entirely happy with the outcome, or some of the means deployed, I agree with the general step." And from there, they could justify it with *actual* reasons, not rationalizations, like "I think that the Hussein regime was a threat to our allies in the region, to the world oil market, and to his own people."

And leave it at that. No need to parrot talking points left or right. And no need for everyone to jump on that person just because we disagree with that position.

Go back to the show for a moment. Simon, a character I have a lot of respect for, starts out the show by taking a position which is completely untennable. He's prepared to let Kaylee Frye die in order to protect River's identity. Now we know why, and Simon makes sense. At the time, everyone on board disagrees with the position. It happens. Let's no let ourselves get caught in this constant thunderdome of mundane political melodrama which is scarely more complex than the political systems of termites.

Quote:

RUE
Wulf

What I see here is that most people psychologicaly never get past their youth. It's sad. To live all those extra decades and be doomed to repeat the same ideas over and over till you get old and die.



I see this all over this forum, I'm trying to give it a nudge.
IMHO, straight line left and right are probaby wrong, but it's not relevent. What's relevent is that someone is running away with all the money power and influence while we bicker.

Quote:

CHRISISALL
Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Its always like this. 2 sides firmly entrenched in their belief structures, unable AND unwilling see the other side.

When dealing with real vs. perceived absolutes, it can be no different.
When one perceives one's beliefs to be infallible, that's pretty much all she wrote.
When one denies or distorts the truth of facts, the ramparts go up.

Simplicity should be employed, but that would lead to concession, and most can't/won't have it.

The realistic Chrisisall



I'll accept this. I think we all should. I would make one edit: I don't think that the distorter is always aware that they are distorting the facts.
But, we should not oppose those absolutes, because doing so does strengthen them, bringing in other rote arguments to their defense as reinforcements.
We should humbly disagree, or ignore, and move on. I think that if someone takes an absolute position, they should accept that all of our positions are subject to change, and so we may all be wrong, and chances are, we all are about many things.

I'll throw this log on the fire so to speak: I've recently found that I had to reverse my position on Proposition 8. I was in favor, now I'm opposed. The reasons are very complicated, and have to do with considering all of the implications for both the gay community and the nation. Ultimately, I think the P8 will destroy the institution of marriage, but that was a conclusion I came to after long and convoluted logic. I'm also uncertain about whether or not this would be a bad thing, but the legislative constitutional nature of it troubles me. Still, it's not a strongly held belief, and I'm still digesting all of the ramifications. I'm certainly not looking for a discussion on it. But I mention it because I think that everyone here can soul search and find an issue that they are unsure of, or recently changing position on, and in doing so, they become humbled, and that humility carries on through other things.

Chris is absolutely right here. If we take an issue, and I'm going to jump topics here to something I care more about, Global warming, then we get into this situation.

An attack against global warming, trying to disprove it, will generate a bullwark of resistance, which is likely to encourage people to spout talking points of the environmental crowd and god forbid, Al Gore's movie.

I think that this is probably one of the greatest dangers to fact this planet, and it is very real, and there is a lot of science behind it. However, I think Al Gore is full of sh*t. The film was idiotic, and probably as bad an argument for global warming as Richard Dawkins is for evolution, and since Dawkins is a friend of a friend, I hope he doesn't read this, because he's blissfully unaware that he's his own worst enemy. But the point being that in order to solve this problem, we need to be blind to the partisan political debate and all of its idiocy from both sides. And this is just one of the potential threats we might be able to address if we weren't playing red/blue sport fans here.

Quote:

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN

This thread is much like Jerry Maguire's mission statement project. I'm glad someone had the moxy to set it out there.

As a Libertarian I often read the partisan bickering and just wag my head and sigh. Often I'm struck with how one person will argue an issue and get it half right, then be rebutted with his/her opponent who has the other half right. Then I mentally take the correct portion from the right...the correct portion from the left...and piece them together to present the answer nobody sees, and then be ignored by both as my solution does not fit an accepted ideoligical viewpoint.



Thank you. This was my favorite response. I tried this before and failed, about 4 years ago.
It's not necessary that we accept each other's viewpoints, only that we accept them as equally valid, even if we happen to disagree with them.

Sure, to those who doubt, I will admit that not everyone will be equally informed on every issue. But don't be too quick to assume that you are the informed, and more importantly, always remember that no one is more informed on every issue than someone else. Everyone has something to say, and is likely to know more about something. And, please, everyone, don't be afraid to admit ignorance.

Quote:


WULFENSTAR

Amen



Quote:

RUE
BSCM

I'm really not in favor of the half of this + half of that = truth approach. Often the truth is all of something.

I'm reminded of a post SignyM made two years or so ago. It had to do with testing your understanding (model) by making predictions. If your predictions are accurate, you can have more confidence that you are focusing on the important factors and drawing correct conclusions. If you cannot predict accurately, then you have errors you need to fix.

This economic mess ? Many of us supposed 'partisan' people were predicting it, not b/c of beliefs but based on the facts: that Bush was running the government into the ground; and that gap between the rich and everyone else (whose demand is the real driver of an economy) was widening.

Iraq ? Many of us supposed 'partisan' people were saying it was no threat, there were no WMDs, and it would be a difficult outcome. This was not based on any hatred, but on reading the reports, watching the gap between what Bush was saying and what he was doing, and crediting the experts with more expertise than the flaks.

Dismissing an opinion or position just b/c it's on 'one side' is a serious mistake. You need to be looking at who makes the better predictions. If you are not, then you're just drawing fact-free partisan conclusions of your own.



I am in favor of the analysis that takes in all viewpoints. It's not always 1/2 and 1/2, but if I vehemently disagree with Auraptor's position, which I assume to be pro- the invasion of Iraq, I'm not 100% correct. There are points in that which I can agree to. We can argue the WMD points, who gave them to Hussein, what he did with them, but this is a waste of time. The reality is that Hussein was a regional threat. I think that Maliki is not. This is in no small part a result of the actions of G.W. Bush, action which I myself wholeheartedly disapprove of. I can still stand on my belief that it was the wrong thing to do. But I can't be sure that I'm right.

Say, devil's advocate, we had done nothing. Would there still be an independent state of Kuwait? Would we care. Would he have pushed for a move against Israel? Would this have provoked a retaliation and created a large scale conflict between Israel and Iraq, and by extension Iran, possible China? Would this lead to an end to peaceful US-China relations? This is a bundle of hypotheticals that I can't answer. I can't even guess. I just know that the actions themselves are outside of my code of ethics. But I can't be sure that I am 100% right.

As for the economic mess, I didn't see any predictions coming from the left that called this one. Three people had it pretty much on the money, imho, Aaron Russo, Ron Paul, and Warren Buffet. Of course, there were a number of economists anyone could have read from the 20s that spelled it all out for you. It has little to do with Bush, accept that he was pressured into the Bernanke and Hank Paulson nominations.

Quote:


CHRISISALL
"Chrisisall Chi: Master Of Adhomeynem- Fu."

Friday, December 12, 2008 - 17:44

Quote:
Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
Often I'm struck with how one person will argue an issue and get it half right, then be rebutted with his/her opponent who has the other half right.

Yeah, I do see that a bit.
I find that when I let peeps know I agree with some portion of what they say, more often than not they roll thru as if they've won the argument, not takin' in to account that I was trying to get to an understanding, not necessarily 'win'.

It's not easy in the middle, is it Blue?


The balancing Chrisisall



In the middle and perspective are not always the same thing. Moderates are not just weak conservatives or weak liberals, or a liberal/conservative hybrid, but people who believe stongly in moderation.

Quote:

CHRISISALL
"Chrisisall Chi: Master Of Adhomeynem- Fu."

Friday, December 12, 2008 - 17:48

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:

I'm really not in favor of the half of this + half of that approach = truth. Often the truth is all of something.

Yes, that's true also IMO. Like torture- it's just wrong, and so-called good guys usin' it don't make it right. There are some absolutes, problem comes when absolutes are ALL one deals in.


The absolutely Chrisisall



Misfacts should be corrected quickly or ignored, not argued about. Or, better yet, questioned, but quizzically. Afterall, sure, some statements like "Iran is building a nuclear bomb and planning to attack Israel." can be discarded as absurd. Iran has no intention of attack Israel, and starting a nuclear war. But are they pursuing a nuclear weapon, is this what that statement would be saying? then the response should be "please clarify" if you care, or "i doubt it" if you don't, or "who cares? they have the right, all of their neighbors have nukes" if you really really don't care.

But overall, I want to see us leave these sorts of issues that we cannot affect, and that do not effect us. The idea that someone is trying to stir up war with Iran, a foolish and dangerous notion, will concern us, especially if conscription or nuclear war are involved. Personally, I don't want to be placed on a terrorist watchlist for having iranian associates. I don't want to see iranian businessmen i know shipped out of the country or flown off to guantanamo, or to see young people drafted into a war which not only would we certainly lose, but which stands no purpose under any god for the improvement of the earth. IMHO. But the dangers of Iran, spare me, spare us all. If someone wants to support that war idea, do so, and be brief, and lets disagree, and move on.

Quote:

BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN

Friday, December 12, 2008 - 18:17

Quote:
Originally posted by rue:
BSCM
I'm really not in favor of the half of this + half of that approach = truth. Often the truth is all of something.

I'm not saying that it's a perfect model, but when I say "I often feel", that's exactly what I mean. I always look at the big picture, or rather the biggest picture I can when it comes to politics. I concern myself with:
The Constitution
Fundemental Rights of individuals
Fundemental Rights of States

What I abhore are arguements over political minutiae and how supposed "intellectual" posters would toss aside, or argue against large scale rights to statisify some particular perceved wrong. The thread "Sore Losers Dance" is a supreme example, where California's right to self-govern is trumped by a special intrest on a singular heated issue, prop 8. No thought is given to the impact on 49 other states. No thought is given to the "unintended consequences" of certain actions. Does anyone here even know about the growing movement in Texas to secede? Does anyone even care? Doubtful.

Rue, the general statement from all my libertarian friends is a wish that the Red-Blue partisians would come to understand and accept as truth the freedoms their opposition espouses.

--That "Blue" partisians would come to grips with the solid fact that economic freedom promotes prosperity.
--That "Red" partisians would freaking stop trying to impose a moral code on individuals and come to grips with another solid fact, that people know best how to govern themselves.



This was a great post of the sort that I want to see more of. Browncoats thinking and communicating about ideas that affect everyone. Who cares what in it I might agree or disagree with. It's in the right direction. I think there's another one coming up.

Quote:

CHRISISALL

Friday, December 12, 2008 - 18:23



Quote:
Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:

--That "Blue" partisians would come to grips with the solid fact that economic freedom promotes prosperity.
--That "Red" partisians would freaking stop trying to impose a moral code on individuals and come to grips with another solid fact, that people know best how to govern themselves.

I can hover with those, in general.

However, in the former, some restrictions must apply, and in the latter, not always, due in part to lack of time and/or intelligent curiosity.

The qualifying Chrisisall



Quote:

COZEN
Y'all crack me up. Though entertaining during my slow moments.

When in power, the point is to maintain, better yet, increase one's power over the commonpeeps. Symbiotically linked with the need to maintain power is following and controlling the money. What's so hard to comprehend?

There are renters and there are owners. The dynamic between the two is where the tensions occur. Make your peace with where you fall in that scenario, or fight for wealth, or fight against those who control wealth.

I've made my peace, due, at a best guess, to geographical circumstance. Easier for me and mine to live a good life here in the northern reaches of North America. So, lucky me. Trite as it may sound, ya can't save everyone, so you might as well save yourself and those you love, as best you can.

Kinda explains my reasoning for not wasting my time arguing here.

***
Oh, wait, ironic conundrum.



I don't buy the ultra economics of this analysis, but I do see the futility.

Quote:


BLUESUNCOMPANYMAN

Quote:
Originally posted by cozen:
When in power, the point is to maintain, better yet, increase one's power over the commonpeeps.



Ya know, I'm really really glad this was posted. It hurts because it's true. Cozen makes a point I long ago came to grips with, and have been fighting my way up through the american lifestyle as a result. But what this bleak outlook doesn't perceve, is another direction. "up" as opposed to left-right, forward-back when you live in flatland. There is in fact a book written that addresses this very issue called "A more perfect constitution" by Larry Sabato. You can purchase a copy on amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/More-Perfect-Constitution-Proposals-Revitalize/d
p/0802716210


I've read this book cover to cover and the main focus is how to go about fixing the problems in the document to truely Form A More Perfect Union.

What's most interesting is that he lays out about 40 solutions to perfecting our union in the book (and makes awsome cases for each one) then conducts a Zogby poll and the result is that over and over an overwhelming population of americans disagree with him. By whopping margins of 80/20 or 90/10. But once you read the book, you wonder why. And the answer is that the overwhelming majority of people are not qualified to think honestly about their governance. They are either 1. Apathetic 2. Pre-programed by idology or 3. Part of the established power-stucture and thus oppose change.

Our founders forsaw that the document they created would not last unless they built in 2 ways to change it. We know well the 1st, to write an amendment. But hardly anyone knows the second. Call a new Constitutional Convention. If a majority of states call for a convention, one must be held. This is where the fundemental text of the document can be changed.

It will never happen. Ever. And in the book he makes a solid case that it must else these united states will slide into the cracks of history.



This is the post I was waiting for. The last line is too defeatest, because it is trapped within a boxed framework of the current political economic model.
I would like to carry this concept further. I worked for the RPUSA for a while, and they were very into this idea, and they too were trappen in the box, and so they fought against the walls of the box, and lost, a predestined conclusion. This reminds me to write them. It is not as hopeless as it seems, and I have a lot of ideas on this, none of which involve anything untoward, but I won't post them here, because the vested interests in the current power structure would benefit by having their weaknesses pointed out, and I'm not about to do that publicly.

But bravo

Quote:

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by bluesuncompanyman:
he makes a solid case that it must else these united states will slide into the cracks of history.

Aren't we slidin' now?

The questioning Chrisisall



The questioning chris agrees with everything :) Actually, I know some people who have made this a master art of getting along with everyone, you do it pretty well. You're also one step further along the road to realization of the above posted ideas.

Quote:

FREMDFIRMA

Well, for my part I have an agenda, and am not shy in admitting that nor pursuing it - yet not at someone else's expense cause putting an end to that crap is a big part of it.

Thing is, I welcome alternative viewpoints, the more windows you have on a subject, the clearer the picture, yes ?

It's when folk start smearing mud (Re: Lies) on those windows that'll start me on a rampage, or when someone starts using their own free will to impinge on or deny that of someone else.

I also tend to give as I get - whereas some will get a polite and reasoned argument, others will recieve a verbal conflagaration, or mockery.

No sense pretending party politics, I only got one side in an issue - MINE.

And above all else, I ain't afraid of admittin that.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it



Frem, you seem to grok the sitch more than most, don't fight the walls, they only punch back.

This was all very informative. I think that if we can agree to move forward on the points of concern, then we can put aside other disagreements. If not everyone is willing to do so, then, sadly, those threads that we devote to progress will simply have to ignore the combative trolls that wander in. Not to call a person a troll, but to say that certain posts are trolls, and to be ignored.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, December 13, 2008 12:09 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:


If AURaptor or anyone else posts something insightful, then we should carry the discussion forward. I think if I take an hour here I can find at least half a dozen insightful posts by AURaptor posted since my recent sign on.

Yeah...that troll comment of mine went a little far...Damn, was I in a crabby mood that day.

Colour me Scotty on K7...isall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, December 13, 2008 1:00 PM

WHOZIT


Yes but we're all Browncoats! Even tho we're differet politicaly we all have 1 thing in common, WE ARE BROWNCOATS!!!

I'm going to microwave a bagel and have sex with it - Peter Griffin

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, December 13, 2008 1:27 PM

CHRISISALL


Quote:

Originally posted by whozit:
Yes but we're all Browncoats! Even tho we're differet politicaly we all have 1 thing in common, WE ARE BROWNCOATS!!!


Some of us are Browncoats with bagel issues...


The cream cheese Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, December 13, 2008 1:55 PM

RIVERLOVE


Quote:

Originally posted by chrisisall:
Look, JewelStaiteFan, RiverLove, Finn- these peeps give good solid arguments for their beliefs- they are integral parts of this board.


That is a very nice thing to say. A real kindness.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, December 13, 2008 2:09 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Quote:

Chrisisall:
Starting a whole post just to target & make fun of a single person is just WRONG!!!!



I take it this is sarcasm, but I agree.

Several things seem wrong. I leave for a few decades and come back and everyone is still at each other's throats about partisan minutiae while the titanic sinks.

This, BTW, is why I left before, and I did it very loudly. Someone started a thread for the purpose of attacking Pirate News, and a lot of people like six year olds on a playground, piled on.





Nuttin persnal. Jus bizniss. Better n shootin bullits. That comes later, with a few killins now and again.

This is an infowar revolution, with 1000s of paid Operatives stalking the internet to censor dissent. Many outsourced to India using canned responses. All part of the hostile takeover of the planet by the NWO banksters and their police-industrial complex.

The DARPAnet as we know won't survive much longer, since the Good Guys will probably lose. Use it or lose it. Tuff to compete with banksters who counterfeit trillions of dollars to bribe useful idiots to do their bidding. If that don't work, their blackmail and assassin teams terminate the opposition. Internet numbers are falling like the stock market, with fewer folks able to afford internet in the Depression.

Batman The Dark Knight Founded 9/11 Truth
Censored by youtube within 2 hours
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1802095826640429181&hl=en
www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=35979

This year I've been censored and banned by several forums and youtube, thanks to police and milspec psyoppers. Cops never get banned, when they started the flame job.

The biker forums are the worst, used by police for intelligence gathering on "biker gangs". According to cops, every biker is in a gang. ATF and FBI even confiscated the website and copyright logo for the Monguls biker gang this year, after arresting 60, for the crime of daring to get their own show on History Channel. But Wall Street banksters stealing $8.5-Trillion from govt pension funds is okay with all cops?

Seems cops HATE anyone who gives free tips on how to win in traffic court, or how to arrest cops, or how good cops can survive their criminal bosses. One cop who got me banned wears a Nazi helmet as his avatar, while killing the First Amendment. No concept of irony.



www.piratenews.org/kill-robocops.html
www.DealsGapDragon.com

DEALS GAP DRAGON: 318 curves, 18 cops and 150 $800 tickets per 11 miles
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7897701284152020417

Freedom is not in their vocabulary. Their business is slavery, and business is good. Very very good.

Besides, whozit takes the heat now.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Saturday, December 13, 2008 5:47 PM

DREAMTROVE


Quote:


CHRISISALL

Yeah...that troll comment of mine went a little far...Damn, was I in a crabby mood that day.

Colour me Scotty on K7...isall



Yah, who hasn't at some point? But we need to move past the reaction to other, even when what we are reaction to is that same sort of reaction to other. Perhaps especially when.

In other news "Cow Nose Ray Exhibit to Reopen"

Quote:

WHOZIT

Yes but we're all Browncoats! Even tho we're differet politicaly we all have 1 thing in common, WE ARE BROWNCOATS!!!



I suspect it implies we have a lot in common which causes us to be fans to the level where we are still talking about this many years later.

Quote:

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by whozit:
Yes but we're all Browncoats! Even tho we're differet politicaly we all have 1 thing in common, WE ARE BROWNCOATS!!!

Some of us are Browncoats with bagel issues...



rofl

I'll be in my bunk. Bagelless.

Quote:

RIVERLOVE

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
Look, JewelStaiteFan, RiverLove, Finn- these peeps give good solid arguments for their beliefs- they are integral parts of this board.


That is a very nice thing to say. A real kindness.



Finn is still around?

Quote:

PIRATENEWS
Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Quote:

Chrisisall:
Starting a whole post just to target & make fun of a single person is just WRONG!!!!


I take it this is sarcasm, but I agree.

Several things seem wrong. I leave for a few decades and come back and everyone is still at each other's throats about partisan minutiae while the titanic sinks.

This, BTW, is why I left before, and I did it very loudly. Someone started a thread for the purpose of attacking Pirate News, and a lot of people like six year olds on a playground, piled on.



Nuttin persnal. Jus bizniss. Better n shootin bullits. That comes later, with a few killins now and again.

This is an infowar revolution, with 1000s of paid Operatives stalking the internet to censor dissent. Many outsourced to India using canned responses. All part of the hostile takeover of the planet by the NWO banksters and their police-industrial complex.

The DARPAnet as we know won't survive much longer, since the Good Guys will probably lose. Use it or lose it. Tuff to compete with banksters who counterfeit trillions of dollars to bribe useful idiots to do their bidding. If that don't work, their blackmail and assassin teams terminate the opposition. Internet numbers are falling like the stock market, with fewer folks able to afford internet in the Depression.



I don't know whether you're getting more coherent, or I'm getting to the point where I understand more, but all of this made perfect sense to me.

Myself, I know a thing or two, Good guys will lose, but there are more good guys. In the end, we win. If I name how and why, I tip my hand, but I see that takeover and raise it a revolution.

Of course, I can argue every point on this, such as, do we outsource to india? Or are they just playing us? Whose game is it anyway?

Quote:

PN
This year I've been censored and banned by several forums and youtube, thanks to police and milspec psyoppers. Cops never get banned, when they started the flame job.

The biker forums are the worst, used by police for intelligence gathering on "biker gangs". According to cops, every biker is in a gang. ATF and FBI even confiscated the website and copyright logo for the Monguls biker gang this year, after arresting 60, for the crime of daring to get their own show on History Channel. But Wall Street banksters stealing $8.5-Trillion from govt pension funds is okay with all cops?

Seems cops HATE anyone who gives free tips on how to win in traffic court, or how to arrest cops, or how good cops can survive their criminal bosses. One cop who got me banned wears a Nazi helmet as his avatar, while killing the First Amendment. No concept of irony.



One word: Hydra.

Quote:

PN
Freedom is not in their vocabulary. Their business is slavery, and business is good. Very very good.



Very true.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 14, 2008 12:55 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

I don't know whether you're getting more coherent, or I'm getting to the point where I understand more, but all of this made perfect sense to me.

It's the latter, DT - cause you also used to think that I was bonkers, and my tune hasn't changed a whit this whole time.

I guess whatever other experiences between then and now have reshaped in some small way your style of looking at things and the world around you, and given your posts since you came back, I'd have to say for the better.

PN's not half as nutty as folks take him for, but he'll play to it to yank a chain here and there, sure.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 14, 2008 9:32 AM

DREAMTROVE


Frem,

My own trip to the looney bin.

Pirate News is a lot less crazy now than he was. I think this is an actual change. He's taking some sort of supplement or change in diet which has put some serotonin into his system.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 14, 2008 10:26 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:

Myself, I know a thing or two, Good guys will lose, but there are more good guys. In the end, we win. If I name how and why, I tip my hand, but I see that takeover and raise it a revolution.



In the American Revolutionary War, only 5% fought the war. A tiny minority always decides the fate of others.

But now the game is SURVIVAL. Even those who don't fight, either with psyops or bullets, must still try to survive. Economically, the engineered Depression will wipe most people out, with a domino effect on physical and mental health. Unless you own a liquor store, business is down 40% so far.

The enemy is banning vitamins all over the world, putting GMO Terminator Seeds in the food supply, putting toxic sludge from the nuke bomb factories in the water supply, putting Barium in the jet exhaust, putting EMP radiation in millions of skulls. Going to a doctor risks 2.5-million murders in USA every year.

The old method of just keeping one's head in the sand won't work much longer.

So even if you don't fight a single infobattle, facing reality might save you and your family, just by applying the facts to your daily life.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 14, 2008 12:04 PM

AG05


I'm new, so I'm not too familiar with folks here. So I make no claims to represent anyone but me.

I just want to be left the hell alone. I want to work at my job, and keep the pay that I earned (for the most part). Once I get that pay, I would like to buy what I please with it. If that means buying a buttload of Cheetos and Beer, and pigging out, so be it. If that means buying the latest and greatest piston-driven AR-15, ok. If I wish to save that money so I can retire, fine. If that means giving my money to some charity, ok.

I'm cool with paying money for a government to keep the roads passable, the legal system working, and keep those heathen Canadians from invading
But that's about it. No universal health care, no social security, none of that extra shit that costs me money and from which I will never see any benefit.

I have a big problem with the concept of "To each according to his need, from each according to his ability." The basic principal is fine, provided that I, the individual, have power over one of those points. I should get to decide either a: what my ability is (in other words, how much can I give to be spent on others), or b: what someone else's need is (in others words, I choose which social programs I wish to spend my money on). I think every American should have that choice.

Of course, there is a flip side to all this choice. It removes an individuals safety net. If I DO spend all my money on Cheetos and Beer, no-one will help me pay for my blood pressure meds and other lardass-related expenses. If I have a job, I'd damned sure better keep it, 'cause Uncle Sam won't be sending me a check every month. So far, I've worked my ass off to keep from being a drain on my community and my country. I've done for myself and not relied on (and certainly not expected) assistance from my gov't. I've done all I can to leave my gov't alone. I just wish It'd do the same.


PS: I apologize for the disjointedness of this post. It was written at work in between customers.


EDIT: I re-read this after posting and realized I sounded like a cold-hearted bastard. I'm not. I'm not saying that health care should be a luxury item, or that old people should be turned into Soylent Green. All I want is the CHOICE of opting out of these programs. I want to be able to choose independent life vs. socialized life. Thats one reason I love Firefly. The Browncoats tried to opt out of Alliance control formally, but failed to do so. Still, the crew of Serenity decided that the indepedent life was more valuable to them than a lawful life. There are times when I can really relate to that sentiment.

Mercy is the mark of a great man.
Guess I'm just a good man.
Well, I'm alright.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 14, 2008 12:16 PM

FREMDFIRMA


AG05...

As I been so fond of sayin, that's all anyone really wants, to pay the bills, live their life in the fashion they chose, and be left to do that.

And it's when Government, Religion, or what have you comes along and gets in the way of that, that folk take up arms, first with pencils, then signs, then voting booth levers, and so on down the line till they're pickin up weapons, at which point someone fucked it up bigtime for things to get that far, and deserves what's comin to em.

It's an awful goddamn simple principle both in theory and practice.

And what's worse, is when you take that from a person, take even the HOPE of it away - that's when you get folks who, having nothing to lose but a life that's completely miserable anyways, start strapping bombs to themselves and walking into crowded cafes just to retaliate on their way out of this world.

And all too often against people uninvolved for the most part who are really no different than they are, just happen to be part of the Religion, Culture or Government/County that has taken from them, and may not even support it.

It's not that hard of a concept to wrap ones mind around - quit fucking with people, and go the hell AWAY, and they eventually quit fucking with you, barring a few crazies here and there who can't get anyone to listen to them without an "external enemy" to rally them against, which we endlessly, thoughtlessly, STUPIDLY provide for them, and vice-versa.

It's not a lot more complex than that.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Sunday, December 14, 2008 3:51 PM

DREAMTROVE


Basically, I agree with everything PN just said. I think that the 2.5 million only counts if you include abortions, which I would be willing to do.

Overall, John, yeah, sure, that's just they sort of thing I'm talking about. Putting the whole picture into a concise 200 words that people will actually read, and then, each part can later be investigated further by interested parties.

I think that owning your own chem lab is probably a safer bet ;)

But realistically, the NWO has his a major snag in its organizational plan. They've made an error in calculation, and since I'm paranoid to think that they are always listening, I am not about to point it out. But the short of it is, I agree on all points, but there will be an opportunity for us, because they have made a major miscalculation.

The head in the sand crowd will not be a part of it, this is always the case.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, July 3, 2024 7:57 AM

JAYNEZTOWN


Dutch wants a better class of people in Holland Netherlands, the Trashy Tourists banned from a country known for Prostitution and other filth


Amsterdam overtourism: City moves to ban cruise ships
https://www.euronews.com/travel/2024/07/02/amsterdam-plans-to-ban-crui
se-ships-from-the-city-centre-what-will-it-mean-for-tourists



and


How Navy Combat has changed



Yemen's Houthis claim fresh attacks against 4 cargo ships
https://www.bignewsnetwork.com/news/274440242/yemens-houthis-claim-fre
sh-attacks-against-4-cargo-ships



Russia lost about 60 vessels in southern Ukraine in a month - Ukrainian Navy
https://global.espreso.tv/russia-ukraine-war-russia-lost-about-60-vess
els-in-southern-ukraine-in-a-month-ukrainian-navy

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Oops! Clown Justin Trudeau accidently "Sieg Heils!" a Nazi inside Canadian parliament
Mon, November 25, 2024 01:24 - 4 posts
Stupid voters enable broken government
Mon, November 25, 2024 01:04 - 130 posts
Russia Invades Ukraine. Again
Mon, November 25, 2024 00:09 - 7499 posts
The predictions thread
Mon, November 25, 2024 00:02 - 1190 posts
Netanyahu to Putin: Iran must withdraw from Syria or Israel will ‘defend itself’
Sun, November 24, 2024 23:56 - 16 posts
Putin's Russia
Sun, November 24, 2024 23:51 - 69 posts
The Olive Branch (Or... a proposed Reboot)
Sun, November 24, 2024 23:44 - 4 posts
Musk Announces Plan To Buy MSNBC And Turn It Into A News Network
Sun, November 24, 2024 23:39 - 2 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Sun, November 24, 2024 23:35 - 4763 posts
Punishing Russia With Sanctions
Sun, November 24, 2024 18:05 - 565 posts
human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
Sun, November 24, 2024 18:01 - 953 posts
Elections; 2024
Sun, November 24, 2024 16:24 - 4799 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL