»
Discussion
»
The Alley
»
Obama
| The Alley |
|
Obama |
|
|
Jaime Fradera Senior Member
since 2000-11-25
Posts 843Where no tyranny is tolerable |
Obama is a populist demigog. So when Obama says: Black ist der master race, ve say heil, heil, right in Obama's face. Mz Bill Monica ain't much better. So when Frau Clinto says: I'm mistress of zis place, Ve sai heil, heil, right up frau Clinton's face. |
||
| © Copyright 2008 The Sun - All Rights Reserved | |||
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
I'm not easily offended, but I find your poem offensive. Nothing personal, just your poem. |
||
|
Midnitesun
since 2001-05-18
Posts 28647Gaia |
Sheesh. This is in poor taste, amigo Jaime. |
||
|
Poet deVine
Administrator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-05-26
Posts 22612Hurricane Alley |
While I don't agree with Jaime, he does have the right to express his opinion here in the Alley - that's what it's for... Interesting take on both candidates though. Maybe you could explain why you feel they are deserving of a 'heil'? The significance of that phrase brings really bad ideas with it. Thanks Jaime! |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
I’m not questioning whether Mr.Fradera has the right to express his opinion, but rather, was it expressed respectfully as it should be according to forum guidelines: “This forum is for flaming, complainin', and screaming your head off. Respectfully, of course.” When two posters step up and say Mr. Fradera’s words are offensive or in poor taste, doesn’t that clearly suggest he has in fact been disrespectful? I read (and write) a lot of political poetry so I’m pretty thick skinned when it comes to rants and raves. In my opinion, this poem has crossed the line into shock jock territory. It has no merit, is not based on fact, is meant to be offensive, comes across as being both racist and sexist, and therefore definitely shows a lack of respect for both the average reader and the candidates. |
||
SEA 
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 2000-01-18
Posts 22676with you |
the fact is, it's his opinion. He didn't ask you to agree with it. I think it's fine, whether I agree or not is irrelevant. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Lol Jen and Midnitesun aren’t asking anyone to agree with their opinions either.  Opinions are fine but that doesn’t mean they should stand unchallenged, they should be questioned and tested by, and against, the opinions of other people. Otherwise all sorts of crazy opinions would go unchecked and given a false patina of legitimacy. That's my opinion on opinions, here's my opinion on the post: If the object of the poem is to demonise the targets it doesn’t work, the references to the Third Reich and the Nazi movement go too far in my opinion. The comparison acts to illicit sympathy for those attacked rather than agreement of the proposed similarities. It turns the targets of hate and derision into victims of hate and derision, of course if that’s the aim of the poem then I guess it works. I still don’t like it though because I know that some people will see the hate and derision and miss the sympathy part altogether. That’s just my opinion though, I’m not asking anyone to agree with it. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
I respect your opinion, Grinch, but guess I’m too dense to understand the sympathy part. Why should anyone feel sympathetic towards a political candidate because someone chooses to pen a rant about them? Also, just curious, do you think if I posted a Bush basher comparing him to Hitler and his administration to the Third Reich, would anyone voice a complaint or would they proudly defend my right to express my off the wall and over the top opinion? Anyway, can’t believe I’ve wasted part of one of my rare Saturdays off on this topic. Here’s what I think a political poem should look like, by Yusef Komunyakaa, a fantastic poet whose work is really worth checking out. http://www.ibiblio.org/ipa/poems/komunyakaa/prisoners.php On a personal note, am finding Dylan’s prose as delicious as his poetry - The Orchards, for instance. Yum yum! http://www.undermilkwood.net/prose_theorchards.html [This message has been edited by Ron (09-08-2008 09:01 AM).] |
||
|
SEA
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 2000-01-18
Posts 22676with you |
"Jen and Midnitesun aren’t asking anyone to agree with their opinions either." exactly. I don't give a flip one way or the other...I think it's pointess to argue over. A complete waste of time, so you guys knock yourselves out.... LOL "Also, just curious, do you think if I posted a Bush basher comparing him to Hitler and his administration to the Third Reich, would anyone voice a complaint or would they proudly defend my right to express my off the wall and over the top opinion?" I think if you don't agree with Bush you should say it, I don't care if you do or not...I don't care if anyone cares if I do or not...it's just not worth it to me to get upset about what someone else thinks. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Because the comparison is unjustifiable, the punishment hate and derision if you like outweighs the crime of alleged political unsuitability. Maybe sympathy is too strong a word but I don‘t think so. It’s like a bully being bullied - just retribution to a point - until it goes too far and becomes a lynching at which point you start to think “he doesn’t deserve that” - is that sympathy? I think so but I may be wrong. quote: Not sure about complaint part as far as other people are concerned. I certainly wouldn’t complain about you voicing an opinion regarding Bush in that way, but then again I don’t think the target in the poem matters, perhaps that's because I‘m English and have no political axe to grind either way. It’s more my thoughts on the validity of the opinion that counts and my opinion would be just the same - Bush doesn’t deserve it for the same reason Obama doesn’t deserve it and I’d definitely voice that opinion. I’d also defend your right to voice your opinion just as long as people are free to voice their opinions against it. I think Thomas only had one voice - lyrical [This message has been edited by Ron (09-08-2008 09:02 AM).] |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
“hate and derision if you like outweighs the crime of alleged political unsuitability” Got what you meant now, Grinch, thanks. In this case it seemed to me more like a blatant case of character assassination rather than dealing with the candidates’ political unsuitability. And of course, that would make them even more victimized than if the poet had addressed their political ideologies or agendas. Interesting! Anyway, do you seriously think that’s what the poet was trying to accomplish, garner sympathy for the two candidates? I agree with you on the one voice - lyrical. If I might, I’d like to add that perhaps reading his prose is the place to start. Jumping right into Dylan’s poems can be a little overwhelming and confusing. But once you’ve read a lot of his prose, his poems seem less of a leap. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: No. And even if that was the aim it’s misguided, as I said the possibility of sympathy is easily missed - especially if you’re partial to a good lynching. I agree on the prose thing, his poems are a condensed or distilled version of his prose and much easier to get into, better to sip beer before tackling the whiskey.  |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Well, he is entitled to his opinion and no one is forced to respond and that's the bottom line. Can it be found distasteful? Sure, but I can go the archives and find things said about Bush that equal it with no complaints. Obama is a one-term senator who has spent a big part of that term running for president and has done little else. Hillary is a senator who has done nothing in the senate, is married to an ex-president,and was put in charge of revamping a health care policy which she couldn't do. These two claim to have qualifications to run the country. I find THAT distasteful enough... |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Some people must think they have what it takes Mike, I’m not an expert when it comes to American politics but presumably you need backing to make it to the top. People close to you for instance, who encourage and put you forward, and people not so close who believe in you enough to vote for you. Perhaps you just don’t see their qualifications as others do, perhaps they’re all wrong and you are right, who knows. You might actually be highlighting a flaw in the American democratic process that allows the wrong person to get the presidential job based on the failure of the people to recognise the evil demigods for what they really are. That thought sparks another, are you willing to accept an un-qualified President? Should you accept one? Can you fall in line and support a leadership you KNOW to be incapable of leading your country? If the comparison of Obama and Clinton with Hitters’ Nazis turns out to be true will you be leading the armed insurrection against them should they come to power or will you be sat in shadows biting your tounge like so many German citizens in the thirties? On reflection perhaps the poem isn’t a criticism highlighting the evil of politicians who would be president, perhaps it’s a criticism of the fools who allow them to get there in the first place and allow them to hold an office they’re unqualified and unsuitable to hold. |
||
|
SEA
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 2000-01-18
Posts 22676with you |
Grinch, there are more Americans that would take up arms than you seem to think...I would. No question. and yeah..I have guns and yes, I realize that was directed at the Deer...just throwing that in there...  for what it's worth...and I know, probably not much... |
||
|
RSWells Member Elite
since 2001-06-17
Posts 2533 |
Any other website would have deleted this crap, sparing decent sensibilities and not providing a platform for other closet fascist/neocon nazi responses. To think after all that's happened during this illegal regime that any supposed american, who isn't one of the uber-wealthy non-taxpayers, war profiteers or greedy polluters would still support it is astonishing. And to the usual suspects....see my posts, note their dates....I was ahead of all of this and the same callous detractors who remained steeped in the comfort of their hate and prejudice still cling desperately to the decaying agenda that has bankrupted our country and made the world far less safe for americans who are now reviled everywhere. These avaricious manipulators could never have maintained power had they not divided us against each other, the antithesis of true democracy. In time it is recognized that only cretins cleave to, what normal, decent people see as obviously flawed and failed agendas....those who yet wail for the revival of the confederate flag....those who blame Jane Fonda or the "hippies" for the fiasco of Vietnam and those who would support an angry, sick old career politician who promises 100 years more of this foolish 21st Century Crusade. As to Mr. Fradera, it's a shame Bloomberg didn't run, then you could screed about a woman, a black AND a jew. Now let's usher in the head cheese who is often absent from rightwing posts, however offensive, but never fails to send the spelling police in after the "lefties." |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Feel free to jump in at any point, this is a Forum which sort of suggests open discussion, the normal etiquette and rules regarding butting in don’t count here, at least that’s how I see it. To be honest, in the scenario I outlined I’m not sure how many Americans I’d expect to rise up against the government and leadership. My heart hopes it’s a lot, my head and the evidence of history suggests it might not be enough. Off the top of my head I’m not sure what proportion of Germans opposed Hitler, I’m not even sure if any credible numbers exist on the net to look up but I’ll certainly try. Even without the figures though we can be certain it wasn’t enough, it could be argued that Germany isn’t America which may have some validity but it depends on a presumption that people are fundamentally different in nature and I’m not sure that’s true. I think in Germany there were a lot of people who supported Hitler, probably a majority in the beginning but as time went on that popularity slipped but Hitler’s political momentum was protected by ruthless treatment of dissenters. By the end of the war my guess would be that the Nazi ideal was held by only a minority of the populace but it’s telling that throughout Hitler’s leadership he wasn’t troubled by mass threats to depose him or internal armed rebellion. Whether that gradual slip from open support to acceptance through fear could happen in America is a difficult question. I expect that if the German people were asked the year before Hitler came to prominence they’d probably say it wasn’t possible, that they would oppose it, that they had guns. For what it’s worth sea I think your input does have value, and thank you for offering it. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
RSWells, Stop beating around the bush and tell us what you really think. Sorry I couldn’t resist. I don’t know whether it’s worth responding to your post in detail, for one thing I’m not sure it’s going to be here long enough. That’s not because I believe there’s some behind the scenes conspiracy to silence your opinion, but rather that the manner in which you voice your opinion could be construed as a clear example of a lack of respect for fellow members. If it’s still here tomorrow I’ll post a response. |
||
|
LadyTom Member
since 2008-02-29
Posts 353LA, CA |
American politics of 4th grader In Ballwin, Mo, children as whole class voted for W Bush IN Arcadia, CA, Children as whole class voted for Obama. Is politics a family culture or what? Are you serious? How much do you know your favorite politician? |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Perhaps you just don’t see their qualifications as others do Grinch, the thing is that there are no qualifications to see. Qualifications are a matter of record. They are either there or not. Obama was a complete unknown until he made a speech at the DNC and impressed people with his speaking ability. That's it. He continues to make good speeches, although it has come to light that many of his speeches have contained more than a few "cut-and-paste" wordings borrowed from other people's speeches. People follow him because his cry is "change!", a popular gambit that many have used. Hillary has done nothing as a senator of New York, handing that ball off to the other senator, allowing her freedom to pursue the presidency. Her only claim to fame was creating a new health care system, which was an abysmal failure. She claims to have qualifications from her time as being first lady but, thanks to her husband, those records are sealed and will not be seen by the public. Her cry is also "Change!". In both cases, change really means putting a Democrat back in the White House and also represents what will be left in one's pocket after their tax hikes. A cry for change? All I can say is...be careful what you wish for. Would I like to see a different system, other than the popularity contest we have now? Absolutely. I would like to see a mininum requirement table that must be met before one can even have the right to run....but it won't happen. If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank a soldier. |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
My goodness gracious! Actual raging, flaming, and opinions in the Alley. With multiple viewpoints! Who would have thought it possible? Opinionating: The poem is hateful and insults the intelligence of both left and right. RE: "I would like to see a mininum requirement table that must be met before one can even have the right to run....but it won't happen." Thank God! Opinionating: We've got a minimum requirement table already: forty years old and a native born citizen. It has produced both notable and minimal Presidents. What might be added? Property ownership? White maleness? Inherited wealth? Graduates of Yale? Additional requirements would be a veiled attempt to make sure that candidates think the way the framers of the requirements do. I don't think you'd want radicals on that committee, and I'd object to reactionaries. RS Wells: We'll, your post is still in place. Maybe the notion of allowing people to dissent without being quashed is gaining a foothold. Personally, I'll be happy when either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama is elected President. I find it interesting that Democratic "lefties" would be "centerists" any where else in the wolrd, and "righties" would be raging oligarchists. A question: Was Pol Pot really entitled to his opinions, one of which was that it was OK to murder a third of his country's citizens? This is a question about the notion of having an unlimited right to one's opinions, not a comparison of anyone to Pol Pot. Do terrorists have a right to their opinions? Awaiting-the-hammer. Jimbeaux |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Yes. Yes terrorists (and would-be Pol Pots) can hold whatever opinions they like - whether they can freely voice them is another question and whether they act on them is a whole different subject. I can plant a bomb that kills hundreds but still possess an opinion on the price of cheese . I can even have an opinion that planting a bomb would be a good idea as long as I didn’t actually plant one, or incite or encourage others to plant one. That’s not strictly true though: I can quite openly hold the opinion that planting a bomb that kills a hundred people is a good idea, I can even encourage and incite other people to plant a bomb that kills a hundred people. All I need to do is ensure that the hundred people I’m talking about are terrorists I don’t think anyone, anywhere would argue with that opinion - even terrorists. |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
Hi Grinch. Nah. Best, Jimbeaux |
||
|
Mistletoe Angel
since 2000-12-17
Posts 32816Portland, Oregon |
quote: There's no question that Barack Obama lacks a certain kind of experience that has often been favored and recommended in American politics: executive and legislative experience.........and in that respect, should Barack Obama become the 44th President of the United States, he will become, hands-down, the least experienced president in American history in that regard. Yet, I also believe, rarely but surely, there comes a time when there is an anti-incumbency vibe permeating the national landscape, where their elected leaders are not fulfilling the promises of the people, where they feel their nation is heading in the wrong direction, and, in contrast from usual sentiments, in wave election cycles like this, "experience" can prove to be a ten-letter dirty word if it means more of the same empty promises and window dressing, the lack of leadership, the absense of judgment. It appears most evident this election cycle will be one of those times, where the 110th Congress is polling at unprecedented new lows since approval rating tracking history began, and the Bush presidency is polling barely north of the lowest approval rating in the history of poll tracking: Harry Truman's 23%, with more than 70% of the nation believes the country is headed in the wrong direction.......despite having a Bush Administration replete with individuals who had served or have been serving in Washington for decades including Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle and others, a House Speaker serving Congress for over twenty years, a Senate Majority Leader serving in Congress for twenty-six years (about forty years of political experience if you include his role as lieutenant governor) a House Minority Leader serving in Congress for eighteen years, and a Senate Minority Leader serving in Congress for twenty-four years (even longer if you count his time as an intern on Capitol Hill). Thus, perhaps that is just part of the problem to many Americans; this type of "experience" is just what's wrong with American politics right now, and many Americans are hungry for some sort of shift from it, many so desperate for it that, when they see a candidate who one is well-aware that he has only served in the US Senate for three years, over a third of that time running for the presidency, he/she is thinking: "It's just crazy enough to work!" or "Why not, I'd go with something new over a repeat of what we've seen these past several years any day!" * Now, conventional wisdom has argued and continues to argue often that Obama is too "inexperienced" to be the President of the United States, thus is "not qualified". My first argument against this notion is that, when you look at the dictionary definition of "qualification", you get: * qualification [kwol-uh-fi-key-shuhn] noun 1. a quality, accomplishment, etc., that fits a person for some function, office, or the like. 2. a circumstance or condition required by law or custom for getting, having, or exercising a right, holding an office, or the like. * The former definition can be open to so many interpretations regarding what constitutes as a genuine "quality" or "accomplishment". Some may argue "military experience" fits that ideal of "accomplishment", others think running or having ran a successful business matches the criteria, yet others think having served as a UN Ambassador to the United Nations, or putting the Pentagon Papers into the public record, or even being a 6¡ä5 tall Hollywood actor, rings true as a sort of worthy quality. I happen to believe myself that Barack Obama possesses some promising qualities that make him qualified to be President in other ways. For instance, while he may lack experience on the executive front, he has many years of experience in the grassroots; working in the early to mid 80's to provide low-income housing to Chicago-area residents as the director of the Developing Communities Project, or spending four years as an assistant attorney at Miner, Barnhill & Galland to represent voices of community organizers and civil rights, or regularly and consistently pushing the issue of anti-proliferation to the public forefront, even before he was elected a Senator in 2004. Now some may argue that the fact he has no military experience alone makes him unqualified. Frankly, I think the fact that Obama has actually lived abroad at times in his life provides an enormously important quality that too many modern presidents have lacked, because it is through such an experience that a sensitivity to the nationalism of other cultures and peoples globally is sharpened so, whenever Obama speaks about issues such as anti-proliferation, the genocide in Darfur and the Middle East peace negotiations, he sounds convincing, and has a great instinctual grasp of international affairs where, on some of his foreign trips I've read about, he knows how to be diplomatic and firm at the same time, like on August 28th, 2006, when he visited Kenya and greeted President Mwai Kibaki with respect, yet at the same time sharply denounced and criticized the graft and erosion of civil liberties that was corrupting the nation, and even went further to visit The Standard in person; a national newspaper that had been ransacked by his party's officials. It's there where I think Obama has had a more direct and personal understanding of these adorementioned issues, moreso than any commander-in-chief in recent memory, because he has actually lived, and has family who have lived and continue to live, in areas of the world where personal liberties and civil rights are seemingly a pipe dream often. And to me at least, when ones knowledge and sensitivity of the issues is personal, sometimes autobiographical, ones credibility is bolstered. THAT'S how I think Obama is actually MORE qualified, in some respects, than either Hillary Clinton or John McCain are, and why I believe he is the most likely of the three to begin restoring our nation's images in the hearts and minds of the international community and showing that America truly is the beacon of freedom and opportunity of the world, which matters the most to me in that, from a national security standpoint, we can't expect to win the fight against terrorism if our country and foreign policy are depicted in an unfavorable, antagonistic light, and the best way to quash these threats is to repair, and sinew, these global alliances to confront these testing threats, with a two-fold sense of pragmatism and firmness constantly gleaming. * I certainly won't deny that Barack Obama's rise to fame has been quite abrupt, and phenominal, as though he trampolined from the unknown to the headlines in a single bound. But I absolutely believe many who are inclined to support Obama are NOT sheep, and have their reasons on why they're supporting him; NOT because his speeches make them feel good, NOT because he's an African-American, NOT because people like the "Obama Girl" said so.....but because they see in him a candidate who has a special set of qualities and accomplishments that make him stand out among the pack that they fathom are presidential. * That doesn't at all diminish that, regardless of which election it is, one should be encouraged to research and study the candidates most carefully, for it would be careless just to wish or gamble for something based on what someone says rhetorically, whether it be "change", "experience" or "leadership"..............which is something I agree wholeheartedly with you on. Sincerely, Noah Eaton "If we have no peace, it is because we have forgotten that we belong to each other" Mother Teresa |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
I'm interested in seeing the verse Jaime Fradera has to offer us on Senator McCain. The discussions of experience used to interest me a great deal; and still do on an academic level. It's become clear to me that if the guy you like has lots of experience, then experience is by golly a thing of vital importance to you: Think Gore in 2000, for example. If the guy you like doesn't have much experience, then a fresh outlook, change and boldness are your watchwords as with Obama today. You could pick Republican examples just as easily, for example, Bush #I in 1992 for experience or Bush # II for inexperience in 2000. This type of disagreement doesn't really do us well, I think. Although it does supply a certain amount of bruising for those of us who feel the need to go out of our way to get that sort of thing, and nobody seems to charge for it. Jaime Fradera appears to have made a mistake that has grown common these days. Mr. Fradera has remembered enough of grade school to know that Nazis were bad. I think Mr. Fradera should be congratulated for this, because history and the memory of history is not a frequent thing during these days of educational budget cuts. It has escaped Mr. Fradera's attention that Senator Obama and Senator Clinton are both Democrats and as such are of the somewhat left-wing part of the political spectrum. Nazis are part of the right wing of the political spectrum. I tell the difference by wearing my watch on my left wrist and noticing the people who are against the things that the nazis did (like torture and preemptive invasion of other countries, and failing to comply with the Geneva convention) tend to agree with my opinions. The further to the Right people tend to place themselves on the political spectrum, you see, the more closely their opinions and the opinions of those other right wing people, the nazis, tend to approach each other. I won't say all people on the right, because it plain isn't true, even if I miss out on some lovely rhetorical ranting. There are plenty of decent and admirable conservative voices about. Nevertheless, the further to the Right people tend to place themselves on the political spectrum, the more closely their opinions and the opinions of those other right wing folks, the nazis, tend to converge. One quick review here: Democrats, Left Wing; Nazis, far right wing. That would mean that the nazi song parody that Mr. Fradera has written would be less appropriate when applied to democrats, who are on the wristwatch and wedding ring side of the political spectrum. By which I mean to say, Left. I only say this because Mr. Fradera has made this error in fact which shows he hasn't understood this point. The parody Mr. Fradera has written would more likely be appropriate for those on the very far right, or the Nazi, side of the spectrum. My colleague, Balladeer, has been trying to help me understand tongue-in-cheek ironic humor. It would be a terrible thing for me not to take a moment, stop, and ask him if I'm headed in the right direction here. Do I have the right idea here, Balladeer? or am I being too subtle? I say very far right, because the presumptive Republican candidate for President, who would seem to be conservative enough for almost everybody, seems to be considered not Right enough by a distressingly large proportion of his Party, including Mr. Limbaugh, a right wing talk show host. Now perhaps Mr. Limbaugh has changed his mind recently, but Senator McCain has not been one of Mr. Limbaugh's favorite people because an 87% approval rate by the conservatives is not Right enough for Mr. Limbaugh. Now Senator McCain is too far right for me, though I believe him to have an admirable streak of integrity. I like him and consider him reasonable. I would love to hear what poems Mr. Fradera would write about Mr. McCain. Would Mr. Fradera consider Senator McCain far right enough for him, or would Mr. Fradera meanly try to call Senator McCain a Nazi as well, simply because Senator McCain isn't far Right enough actually to be a Nazi? At what point are people far enough to the right for Mr. Fradera to stop calling them Nazis? It certainly looks possibly that the point may well be the point where the actual Nazis begin. As a result, I look forward to hearing Mr. Fradera's compositions about not only Senator McCain but about Mr. Limbaugh as well. I also look forward to hearing Mr. Fradera's notions about cutting the fat in the educational system. Apparently all those wasted educational dollars haven't hurt Mr. Fradera at all, and we may soon look forward to raising our children with all of Mr. Fradera's intellectual advantages. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Balladeer, Tax Hikes? Somebody's got to pay the Mastercard Bill for the last seven years. I think you may be a little bit upset because you believed them when they told you the Mastercard bill would pay itself if they gave it a fancy name, like trickledown economics. Now who are you going to believe, that sweet sweet Republican economic jive talk or your lying eyes? |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. “Nazis are part of the right wing of the political spectrum” http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZGRhYzUyY2QyMDVmMTc1ZDY0Y2ZlNjE1ZThlMzU3M2E= . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Huan Yi, The New Oxford American Dictionary tells us that fascism may also be spelled with a capital F, it is a noun, and that it is "an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization." "(in general use) extreme right wing, authoritarian or intolerant views or practice." It defines Nazi as a noun as, historically, "a member of The National Socialist German Workers Party" "A member of an organization with a similar ideology." "[derogatory] a person who holds and acts brutally in accordance with extreme racist or authoritarian views." I believe my use of the concept Nazi and my identification of it as extreme right wing are correct. The article you reference is from a journal with a solidly right wing bias. Neither the Nazis nor the Communists could stand each other during the Weimar Republic. They had riots in which they killed each other in the streets and despised each other's politics, according to William Shirer in The Rise and Fall of The Third Reich. I'm was told when I was a kid by so old lefties that the single thing that did the most damage to the American Communist Party, which was apparently doing fairly well until that point, was the Hitler-Stalin non-aggression pact. In the space of a single week, the party position in the United States was supposed to make a complete turnaround, a 180, from saying that the U.S. Should immediately intervene on behalf of the British and the Poles to saying, let the Europeans solve European problems. The U.S. should stay out of it. The reconciliation with the fascists was more than the U.S. party could stomach. Or at least an awful lot of them. Should you care to, you might look up "liberal" yourself. My opinion is that part of the pickle we are in has to do with a war on language. I am conscious of this as a series of attacks by the right wing on the left wing directed not at the issues but at the language of the party. "Liberal" has become "The 'L' word" in partisan discussions. "The Democratic Party" has become "The Democrat Party." I'm not aware of language going the other way, but there may well be. I'd be interested in hearing about it. I think it damages the political process by stirring up deep levels of rage. I for one have never believed that old saw about words never hurting. It sure doesn't fit my experience. Anyway, thoughts? I'll be out of town for a while, so I won't be able to respond for a while, probably, but I am interested. Best, BobK. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Must be my lying eyes, Bob. I don't know how many times I've told those suckers to stop lying but....bam! There they go again, lying like banshees. I just don't know what to do. Oh, I know. I'll tell them that whatever you say is the truth and anything else they might see is a lie. That should solve the problem, ok? I must be upset? You know much less about me than you think...but let the suppositions continue, if you like. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Balladeer, I hate being misrepresented myself. I don't like misrepresenting you. If that's what you see me as doing,first let me say I'm sorry, and then let me ask you to tell me what I've gotten wrong. I thought you were saying that the democrats would raise taxes and that was wrong. And I thought my response was that somebody had to take responsibility for the give-away of enormous proportions over the last eight years. And that when you run up debts, you have to pay them off somehow. The republicans have been saying this is all one big stimulus package. They've given breaks to their friends who, instead of keeping the money at home and using it as predicted by the republican economists as a trickle down economy booster, have taken it overseas, to China and the middle east. The democrats are not blameless from my point of view, Mike. I think they should have set limits and blocked as much of the giveaway stuff as they could have; they were pretty spineless. I don't want to put your views incorrectly or shade them badly. It's bad writing, and it's bad friendship. Fill me in, please. Bob k. |
||
|
Jaime Fradera Senior Member
since 2000-11-25
Posts 843Where no tyranny is tolerable |
I should explain, belatedly, that this post is a take off on a Disney Cartoon, Der Feurer's face, which meant to caricature the Nazi movement Circa 1943. My post is a way of caricaturing the low level of political discourse, hyperbole and demagoguery that has typified the behavior of certain politicians who tell us we are victims and then promise that they have the answers and will give us anything we want. Just listen to the Rev Wright and tell me his church services don't sound like giant Nazi rallies in Nuremberg, complete with blatant racist incitement against the 21st century equivalent of the Jews, "rich WHITE PEOPLE. In my opinion, Obama, who I'm sure privately thinks he lives in the U S of kka, will never be able to rectify the colossal political mistake he has made by just casting himself as our misleader and wanna be tyrant. Where are Jack Kennedy, Scoop Jackson and Adlai Stevenson when we need them? Southern Cross |
||
|
Jaime Fradera Senior Member
since 2000-11-25
Posts 843Where no tyranny is tolerable |
O, and I forgot. of course it is in bad taste. Satire often is, especially to those being satirized. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. http://www.ibdeditorials.com/CartoonPopUp.aspx?id=254432863424008 . |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4P_iP9u_3co |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Also, just curious, do you think if I posted a Bush basher comparing him to Hitler and his administration to the Third Reich, would anyone voice a complaint or would they proudly defend my right to express my off the wall and over the top opinion? Sure, there would be complaints, basically from Republicans, just as in this thread, the complaints come from Democrats. Case in point, there was not one Democrat speaking against Michael Moore's pack of lies or his sleaziness. The innuendos and "pack of lies",btw, are well-documented but, since it served Democrat interests, Moore was applauded, hugged by the bean farmer and given a seat of honor at the Democrat convention. Seen anything of Moore since the last election. Even the Democrats stopped holding their noses and moved to a safe distance from him. What DO the Democrats complain about? Oh, yes, the OBAMA NATION book. Noe THAT to them is a pack of lies and innuendos that they are screaming at the top of their lungs about. Ya gotta laugh  Noah, Obama's election "might be crazy enough to work"? Could be....do you want to take that chance in today's world? Your choice. BobK, yes, trickle down economics is such a ridiculous title, isn't it? I mean, the whole concept of money flowing from the top down through the other levels would never work, i suppose. Think of that the next time when you buy a loaf of bread, parts of your money going to the bakers, the store employees, the cashiers, the bagboys, the designers of the label, etc, etc, etc.....Even JFK suffered under the delusion that it was a valid and practical way to go....but what did he know? At any rate, at least the Democrats are targeting what's important in this country....McCain doesn't know how many houses he owns. Perhaps they should check with John Kerry, who also has a very rich wife. Think he knows what holdings HE has? The party of Kerry, Gore, Kennedy, Edwards and dozens of other multi-multi-millionaires want to portray McCain as an elitist who can't relate to the common man like they can. Good grief!!!  Anyway, now that Obama has selected his VP, he has shown just how much he is an agent for change or, as the Associated Press writes.. DENVER - The candidate of change went with the status quo. In picking Sen. Joe Biden to be his running mate, Barack Obama sought to shore up his weakness — inexperience in office and on foreign policy — rather than underscore his strength as a new-generation candidate defying political conventions. He picked a 35-year veteran of the Senate — the ultimate insider — rather than a candidate from outside Washington, such as Govs. Tim Kaine of Virginia or Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas; or from outside his party, such as Sen. Chuck Hagel of Nebraska; or from outside the mostly white male club of vice presidential candidates. Hillary Rodham Clinton didn't even make his short list. So much for the changemeister.... End of Saturday morning rant. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Surely you can do better than that, Balladeer, no biting edge, no sting at all. My fairy godmother finally came through. Obama/Biden - my dream team ticket from the very beginning, though not necessarily in that order. It's a good day! |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
hehe...the new me. No bite, no sting, no response to goading...just good plain sense on display Your dream ticket? Remember, nightmares are just dreams on steroids! Sleep well |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Time to come out of your basement, Balladeer, the real nightmare will soon be over when Bush packs up the pig farm, slips off to a high rise in Dubai or a brush ranch in Paraguay and Cheney hunkers down in sealed bunker at an undisclosed location with a speed dial connection to Carlyle and Halliburton on his teleporter. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
I think he’s made a good choice. quote: Think about it Mike, He picked a 35-year veteran of the Senate — the ultimate insider - and changed him into his right hand man. He’s gained a powerful ally and removed a potential future thorn in his side all in one move, score one for the changemeister. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
You think Obama has changed Biden, Grinch??? I've still got that swampland down here for sale, if you're interested. It's one of those old "I've got you right where you want me" scenarios. Biden's not doing it for Obama. He's doing it for Biden.He's already stated on numerous occasions that Obama is not ready or qualified enough for the position. Interesting...it's very similar to the initial Bush-Cheney ticket. Many people voted for Bush, confident in the fact that the qualified and intelligent Cheney would be there being the power behind the throne. Well, we all know how that worked out. I think many Democrats will be thinking the same...Obama the charismatic unqualified candidate with the veteran Biden alongside to assist when cue cards are not available and make the decisions that need to be made. Should be interesting..... |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Jennifer, what a complete misrepresentation! You know as well as anyone that there are no basements in Florida!!! |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
My mistake, Balladeer, forgot you were in Florida. I should have said pull your head out of the swampland of Bush apologists. Surely you can do better than those inane, littlegreenfootball, right-wing talking points? To put it simply, one can either vote for Obama/Biden, or the Bush Hugger, MoreOfTheSame McCain - more wars, more torture, more killing, more of our money in big oil’s pockets, more of our troops coming home in body bags, more debt, more cronyism, more failed foreign policy, more of our freedoms and rights down the tube, more losing their jobs, their homes, while more no bid contracts keep on filling Bush and Cheney’s Carlyle/Haliburton coffers. And to top it off, a vote for McCain means a vote for a hot tempered, loose cannon, senior moment sufferer with his finger on the Armageddon button. For those who still don’t get it, let me spell it out, McCain’s sold his soul to the Bush Cabal in return for financing his campaign. Cheney and the PNAC will still be pulling the strings, but on new Presidential Puppet, MoreOfTheSame McCain. Obama/Biden, a cool drink of water after eight years of drought. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: No Mike, I’m not that stupid, I think being VP will change Biden. One change we’ve already seen though is Bidens views on whether Obama is ready to be President, in 2007 Biden said: “'I think he can be ready but right now, I don't believe he is.” In 2008 it seems things have changed enough for him to recognise that Obama is now ready. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Balladeer, You've got "moderator" listed after your name here, Balladeer; I'm not sure I understand entirely. Is the title honorary? If so, you certainly do deserve it. You've had lots of experience with this sort of thing. If it actually signifies some sort of role in the discussion, though, I'd be interested in knowing what that role would be, because you're being pretty partisan, and I'm not used to thinking of actual moderators as functioning that way. I am curious, so I know how to deal with your comments in a more appropriate way. Deference is never too far out of place, of course. I was interested in your comment about the Bush Cheney ticket, and how we all know how that turned out. If in fact you share some of the upset and disillusionment that the rest of us have shared with that particular ticket over the past eight years, I do find it refreshing that you've come to a point where you feel free enough to say so. I feel they've done as much damage to the Republican party as they have to the country as a whole, which seems a sad thing to say for a Democrat, but I feel that we do need a strong two party system. I liked Biden as a potential Presidential candidate previously over Obama because of his experience and his straightforwardness, but I feel that Obama will do. He got into Harvard Law without mention of race on his application, though mention of race might have helped his chances. He turned down offers from New York law practices and went back to Chicago and did community organizing. To me that counts for a lot. It's about time that the nasty biographies and the slurs started circulating, and, as you pointed out, everybody gets particularly incensed at the more annoying stuff circulated by their opponents. Usually the upset is for good reason: Either somebody's struck pay-dirt or somebody's come up with something so disgusting that it makes everybody gag and occasionally, both. We could trade stories sometime, if you'd like, but I suspect all that would happen is that we'd both end up feeling justifiably upset. Who needs that. The two of us did speak on one occasion about trickle down economics. I enjoy your comments about JFK believing in them. The part of that I understand to be true is that he believed in giving tax cuts to the upper brackets. If you in fact mean other than this, you're going to have to say so, so I can address that issue separately. The last time I spoke to you about this issue I quoted to you the articles from the Economist, a well researched right of center English journal of world affairs, news and business with a research bureau as well thought of as the Jane's Defense folks and other sources pointing out the fallacy of this thinking. Upper tax bracket taxes in Kennedy's time ran to 90%, and therefor the tax cuts would (and did) more than pay for themselves. Tax cuts for the upper tax brackets result in a long term pay back rate of about 70% on the Laffer curve. This means that we lose 30% of every dollar cut in high end tax relief at this point in time. If you want to go back through the old posts, that article and others are referenced for your information pleasure. If you check out the Wikipedia article on trickle down economics, you will see that a fair number of Republicans are denying that Reagan or Bush senior or many other Republican figures (including David Stockman) ever believed in or backed "trickle down Economics." The current administration is, I believe, behind it 100%. The country looses 30% on the dollar, but their pals gain it; what's not for them to like. And apparently there's an audience they can sell it to as well. Let's not forget, in an effort to be fair, that Clinton helped pass a 2.6% tax cut for the upper bracket as well. Balladeer, you mentioned something about "the bean farmer." The reference escapes me, though I assume it's some slur on a democrat. Which Democrat are you slurring without provocation this time? I say so because I'm not aware of any Democratic bean farmers offering up personal insults to you, but perhaps I am uninformed. If so, I'm sorry for thinking that you'd consider doing such a thing. I'll trying writing again. It's good seeing you in the thread, acerbic yet lovable as ever. All my best, Bob Kaven |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Jennifer, only you could accuse me of using talking points and then use every democrat talking point under the sun in your reference to Bush....good grief! Did you do that all in one breath or did you have to stop for oxygen somewhere between torture and annihilation of personal rights???? Bob, my reference to the bean farmer was, of course, the one and only Jimmy Carter. Yes, when he hugged Michael Moore and sat him at the VIP table, he insulted me and millions of other decent Americans. With reference to the moniker of moderator, here at Passions there are moderators for each forum. If you look at the top of the thread you will see the names of the moderators of the Alley. I am the moderator for the Open Forum, where I am a fair and impartial upholder of the rules of the forum. Here in the Alley I'm just a civilian, unshackled by the moderator's duties and able to express my personal views, just like anyone else. If I am out of line, like anyone else, I will be properly chastised and warned, as I have been in the past by that evil Alleycat. Hopefully, that will straighten out the confusion. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
If in fact you share some of the upset and disillusionment that the rest of us have shared with that particular ticket over the past eight years, I do find it refreshing that you've come to a point where you feel free enough to say so. Bob, I'm afraid you have missed several of my posts. I have been at odds with Bush on more than one issue, from stem cell research to immigration. Cheney? I have no idea what happened there. I, like many, many others, held Cheney in great respect with a sterling record and as a man of obvious high intelligence. As vice-president, he became basically non-existant, don't ask me why. I doubt seriously that Bush told him to go sit in the corner because Cheney was not the kind of man who would have accepted that. He just.....disappeared. Do I share some of the disillusionment with you and the democrats? Yes, but for different reasons. I don't think he has been an extremely good president with regard to national endeavors. I am at odds with several of his policies and he has spent too much money. Having said that - and the difference between me and you and your many friends - I feel he will be remembered as one of our best presidents for the simple fact of what he has done in the Middle East, his war on terror policies, and his surveillance policies, which you despise and which I feel has been instrumental in maintaining our safety. Terrorist groups around the world are running and hiding based on what he initiated and which other countries have adapted. He stood up to the do-nothing, corrupt organization called the UN, which no one else has ever had the guts to do. He put his political future on the line early in his first term because he felt that the actions necessary were more important. I don't see a Kerry or a Gore doing that and I thank God that Bush was in the Oval Office after 9-11, and not someone like Clinton, who did nothing after the first WTC bombing.You may agree or disagree, but neither one of us will change the other's feelings on this, I know, and that's ok, too. I also believe that the democrats' actions during his term have been despicable, unequalled in American history, and, if I were a democrat, I would be as equally ashamed of them. I also find it interesting that, when there is a Democrat president and a Republican congress, any blame for country woes goes to congress and when the is a republican president and a Democrat congress, the blame goes to the president. Interesting how that works, especially now, at a time we are cursed with the worst congress in history, especially after this last debacle of Pelosi closing the foors, turning out the lights and kicking out the news media to go on vacation at a time a vote was due on an energy bill she knew would pass that she was against. Well, I hope she is enjoying her vacation. I can assure you, should you care to admit it or not, I think you would acknowledge that if a Republican congress did that, the Demcrats would be having caniption fits over it and the headlines would be filled with the "evil" republicans who sneaked away while the country was suffering....but we are used to that. As a rule, republicans seem to feel that the country is strong and in decent shape and democrats seem to feel that the country is wrecked and falling apart. I also feel that, should a democrat win the presidency, the country will once again be strong and in decent shape to the democrats. Wanna bet? I'll even give you odds.... [This message has been edited by Balladeer (08-24-2008 12:03 AM).] |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/X/e/1/mccain_bush_brokeback.jpg |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
 |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
Mike, I believe when you think about it you’ll appreciate that whoever it was pulled off a very intelligent if not brilliant maneuver. With Biden on the ticket Obama becomes the affirmative action token which guarantees the old guard a certain large percentage of the votes. Obama’s lack of qualification or experience no longer matters. Nobody need concern themselves that if elected Obama would actually be running the government. John |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Yes, exactly what I pointed out in response #40 of this thread, John. |
||
|
byski Member
since 2006-01-26
Posts 235Alberta, Canada |
LOL! That about sums it up. If some people are about to get offended by this piece lets take a step back into history. Since the American government took its dollar off of the gold standard in 1971 we have seen rising inflation and a sinking value of its currency. The question to ask is has this occurred in any other society in the past, and if so how did it affect the society? We can trace the first devaluation of money back to the early roman empire where all coins that were brought in as tax were melted down, mixed in with other metals and sent back out into the market (Inflation). This was one attributing reason to the fall of the Roman Empire. The more relavent example (which is the one that is being referenced here) is post WWI Germany. Combined with trade embargoes this put Germany into the same position that America is in now. And what did rise out of that period of great turmoil? It goes without saying that when a society is in great economic stress it opens the way to more extreme solutions. Now Obama and Clinton are not like Hitler in many ways, but the question is how are they similar? Only time will tell... |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Balladeer, I was looking at your posting about Bush and Cheney. I appreciate your being willing to set out your sense of things there, especially with the stem cell research, where I suspect we may agree. Since we haven’t spoken about immigration, I really don’t know, but I can see that you have differences with the man, though they may be the same as or different than my own. It’d be interesting to find out some time. I was fascinated to see how differently the two of us thought about Cheney. Is your point of view a common republican point of view here, or is it your own more particular point of view? I’ve always tended to see Cheney as the point man for the administration, and as the guy taking the lead position when some new initiative, especially an initiative that would probably upset the democrats, was being proposed. And I think that a lot of other Democrats tend to see him the same way. I’m not sure, mind you, that we are seeing anything different. The republicans may simply be seeing things and saying, Gee, that’s skimpy. that’s not enough of the industrial strength Cheney we’ve so come to love and admire; while the democrats are saying, Holy Cow!, these are the ultimate depths of evil; how do we stop this guy before he turns the world into a radioactive slag heap? You know I tend toward the democratic side of things here, of course, but I’m not sure if what I’m seeing is all that different in terms of actual activity and behavior than what you are. When I see the reaction of Mr. Fradera to the campaign of Senator Obama, or your own reaction, or Huan Yi’s, I feel as though I’m looking into a fun-house gallery of mirrors. Such is the level of fear and alarm portrayed. I think we don’t make sense to each other. I’ve never been able to establish a really decent level of conversation with Mr. Fradera, partly my own fault, I’m sure, but am am able to talk decently with you at times and I make an effort from time to time with Huan Yi. I could do better, but I do respect his sense of honor and his courage and his patriotism. I couldn’t expect your disillusionmnent with this administration to be the same as mine, Our points of view about so many important things are different. It would be hard for Kerry or Gore to put their Presidential futures on the line, as you seem to expect them to do, without them actually having taken office. It seems unreasonable for you to expect them to do so, though I believe your general sense of outrage is great enough for you to feel like the statement makes sense, even when it doesn’t. Clinton pursued legal sanctions against the people responsible for the original bombing. Those people are in jail now, and following the atrocities of 9/11 we had world-wide support in any sane sanctions we wanted to pursue in relation to those activities. It took a lot of bad choices and ill-considered actions to waste that outpouring of massed good-will and support. I’m unhappy to say that we accomplished the task in record time. It didn’t have to be that way. Even the military said it didn’t have to be that way at the time. It’s taken all this time for the administration to even begin to start to look at some of the stuff the military was saying from the beginning about asymetrical warfare and the way to deal with insurrections. This administration for several years was busy denying there even were insurrections and civil war senerios going on, all at the cost of treasure, troops and civilian deaths, all to shore up an untenable policy. I suggested a website for you to check out about asymetrical warfare written by military and diplomatic people on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan because I didn’t want you to take my word on the subject. It’s there in the back listings somewhere, should you actually want to check it out. It’s not about winningf a debate, it’s about what’s vbest for our country, what’s best for the military and for the diplomatic initiatives, and what kind of realistic policy should we be following. That’s too important to leave to party leaders, democratic or republican. There’s no substitute for actually doing the reading and listening to what the folks on the ground have to say, and reading as many books from as many different points of view as you can. I’m not aware of the U.N. being any more corrupt than any other large political organization I know about. I include the United States government and both the Democratic and Republican parties in that statement. If you have some way of measuring other than pure animus, please let me know. I’m open to new information. But I’d bet that the information isn’t particularly new or startling and that the level of corruption isn’t particularly different, overall. How are you going to measure? I’m not particularly interested in changing your feeling on any of this. Feelings are feelings, and may not be particularly open to reason. Hopefully, you aren’t closed minded about facts, whatever your feelings may be. Your feelings are your own. The facts should be open to confirmation and verification. If they’re false, then conclusions and reasoning based on those facts have to be re-examined. Doesn’t mean that you can fly unassisted, just because you feel you can. It could be the LSD talking, you know; or the funny ideas you picked up when you were under your Godfather Tweety’s wing. For reasons somewhat different than yours, I’m not so thrilled with the actions of the Democrats over the last eight years either. I feel they should have been willing to be fully as obstructive as the Republicans are now proving to be. I think they were cowardly not to be so, and not to fillabuster frequently, though I think they didn’t always have the votes to make that stick. I don’t think they were as nasty as the Republicans were and are willing to be. I think that may have been a mistake also. As for not voting on the energy Bill, I’m not particularly bothered by that. I don’t see that there will be any effect at the pumps. If there’s money to be made drilling, then there are a lot of oil leases that the oil companies already own that are unused inside the United States, and they should start drilling there, instead of pretending that their only hope is in acquiring land they don’t own. They should try using what they have and show they can manage that well. Among other things, they should show that, as Multinational companies, they would actually SELL THE OIL TO CONSUMERS IN THE UNITED STATES INSTEAD OF SHIPPING U.S. OIL TO CONSUMERS OUTSIDE THE U.S., AND LEAVE US WITH THE SAME OIL PROBLEMS BUT WITH NO DOMESTIC OIL RESERVES TO SOLVE THEM WITH. You pretend that we would be selling to domestic oil producers whose interest is in supplying only U.S. markets. Show me how is this the case. They would like to give us this impression, certainly; but as long as oil prices are higher other places, why would they not sell their oil there? Their share holders would be surprised to find that they’ve invested in charitable organizations. So would almost everybody else except the political operatives who are busy trying to rally the Republican base with this series of half-truths and insinuations. Apparently you feel that the August congressional vacation was early? I have to say, Mike, that I really don’t know when it’s actually scheduled most years. How early was the vacation this year? If it was very early, perhaps some other legislation might have been considered, Was there something that was waiting on the legislative agenda that was especially important, or was this actually the last thing on the agenda for the year? Perhaps a pay raise for the troops, an extention in health benefits for them, some sort of move to economize on the medicare and medicaid budgets by making sure that all the drugs were put out for low bids, as they are in the V.A.—that’d save a bunch of cash, wouldn’t it? I understand though that the Republican’s feel these things shouldn’t make it to the debate at all. So instead of drilling on land they already own drilling right on, the oil companies are basically holding us all hostage until we give away more rights to them that they may or may not use. If our current situation is any example, then the answer is NOT. At least not until they can extrort larger amounts of money from us without showing any return committment except to their own profits. Maybe they’ll sell us the oil, maybe China or Korea or Japan or India. They’ll just hint that it’s for us until they get us to sign on the dotted line. BobK |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
quote: Dear Mr. Byski, Please clarify this for me. It seems functionally senseless; one could actually mix and match any three names with as much intellectual gain. Exactly what do you mean by this puzzling statement? Yours in bewildered confusion, BobK Now Philip Morris and e.e. cummings are not like Howard Stern in many ways, but the question is how are they similar? Only time will tell... Now Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingerich are not like Howdie Doody in many ways, but the question is how are they similar? Only time will tell... That one has downright eerie overtones, something about the cheeks and the hair of all three of them makes me shiver; but, as Mr. Byski so aptly intones, only time will tell. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWZhNWYwNWMxYzI0OGQ3M2M0YWQ0YWVmNTdmYWEyMTE= . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Huan Yi, Was that a change in subject because the previous material was simply too difficult to deal with or is there a connection here that I haven't understood? Or am I stating things unfairly? Mr. Bysky was gnomic as well, but did try to express a point of view that might be addressed. Is there one of yours here? Bob K |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
I’m not aware of the U.N. being any more corrupt than any other large political organization I know about. Is that the litmus test, Bob? Not being more corrupt? I don’t think they were as nasty as the Republicans were and are willing to be. Bob, no matter how many years I read posts in the Alley, I will guarantee you that I will NEVER see a statement as incredible as that one. If there’s money to be made drilling, then there are a lot of oil leases that the oil companies already own that are unused inside the United States, and they should start drilling there, instead of pretending that their only hope is in acquiring land they don’t own. Bob, owning the land and the leases are not enough. They also have to have the permissions that the government doles out, when ever they are in the mood, which has been very, very infrequently. Your argument that they would not sell the oil to American companies is simply the latest scare tactic used by the Democrats. First it was the environment going to hell and, now that they can't get any mileage out of that, they come up with this ridiculous argument. I can understand them coming up with it. I can't understand intelligent people like you buying and preaching it. I have to say, Mike, that I really don’t know when it’s actually scheduled most years. Bob, playing Hayseed Harry doesn't suit you. You are an intelligent man and everyone who reads your posts knows this. Please don't be insulting by trying to pretend you are not. The point is not when their vacation is scheduled. The point is that there was an important piece of legislation waiting to be voted on involving our energy situation. These facts are clear - polls indocated the public wanted it passed. There were enough votes for it to pass, thanks to Democrats crossing the line to vote for it - and Nancy Pelosi did NOT want that to happen, so much so that she had the press physically removed from the Senate and beat the hastiest retreat since Custer at the Little Big Horn. Is there some kind of directive written somewhere that Congress cannot begin their vacation one day later than planned, when something serious needs to be dealth with? I stand by my strong belief that, if the parties were reverse, the Democrats would go berzerk at Republicans walking out. They would be pointing their fingers and telling every citizen that would listen that this was proof the Republicans did not care about the American people or what they wanted. Instead, I see someone saying something like, "Well, it was their vacation time." There is little wonder that this Democrat congress will go down as the worst in US history and well-deserving of their record low popularity percentage. the oil companies are basically holding us all hostage At least not until they can extrort larger amounts of money from us They’ll just hint that it’s for us until they get us to sign on the dotted line. If you would have found some way to stick Wal-Mart, Haliburton and Bill Gates in there, you would receive a Democrat Silver Star! So we can do it your way. We will not allow the oil companies to drill for oil so that they won't tell us to get lost while they ship it over to Japan or India.That'll teach them... There’s no substitute for actually doing the reading and listening to what the folks on the ground have to say, and reading as many books from as many different points of view as you can. I agree. Why don't you tell that to the Democrats, Bob? They have tried to second-guess everything the military commanders have told them that didn't connect what they want to hear. While you're at it, tell Obama who, after speaking with General Petraus, said something like, "Well, he's a good fella but we have disagreements." Obama having disagreements with our best general.....that should be enough to scare anyone. Bob. let's face it. We are simply not going to agree or even see things eye to eye. You will continue to believe what you believe and so will I. Yes, facts are good along with links but then it comes down to something like congress tucking their Democratic tails and heading for the hills, you will spin it in a way that absolves them and I will protray it in a different light. It's not a factual thing - it's a perspective thing. We will simply continuing agreeing to disagree, respectfully. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Balladeer, Thanks for getting back to me so promptly and for being willing to continue the discussion. I really do think there’s more to this than spin. I do try to acknowledge when I think the Democrats are wrong and what I think they are wrong about, and I notice too that you do your best to convey puzzlement about Republican actions that actually do confuse you. I don’t believe we have to be puzzled about what we expect the other person to be puzzled about in order to have a useful political conversation. And yes, I do believe the facts are important. And I think you do as well. quote: Back at you, Mike. Yes. You are willing to punish the U.N. for its corruption which is not essentially different than that of the U.S. Government, The Democratic Party or even your own much beloved Republican party. Possibly less. Possibly a bit more. In return for a lessened chance for war and other major world upheaval, or for a measure of control on the severity they inflict on humanity as a whole, I think yes. Certainly less corrupt would be better; I think so. quote: I can see we are both offering opinions here. When I offer an opinion, I should expect to get an opinion back. Should you care to offer specifics about any of those situations, it would be an interesting discussion, but of course since you’ve made yourself the judge, all hint of impartiality is out the window. Is there somebody you’d like to consider as judge who knows the Alley and who’s familiar with the postings and who is neutral who might be willing to render an impartial opinion on the matter? That would be somebody we both thought to be impartial. I’d suspect that, at the minimum, they’d back off making a call at all. And if they did any fact checking rather than simply accepting raw news feeds, they’d probably agree with me, though there are some pretty stupid talk show hosts out there on either side. quote: First, I’d like some references about the permissions the Government doles out. The off-shore drilling is already specifically set aside, as I understand it, by a combination of state and Federal laws, as protected land. If the oil companies find that process too difficult to deal with that process, they might as well stop now. The reasons for the lack of flow from most of these domestic wells so far, as I understand it, is that the cost of extraction has been too high to make it worth the while of the companies to exploit the leases and the oil companies haven’t thought it worth their while to push to open the areas up. Certainly they’ll sell oil to American companies. But American companies will be competing against companies who are more willing to pay higher prices and where the profit margins of the companies are to some extent subsidized by the government. For example in Japan or in England or in France with National health care, companies don’t have to add that cost to their operating expenses. In effect, it’s cheaper for these foreign companies to buy the same oil. It does nothing to help expenses at our pumps, it merely makes things work better in India and Japan. We cut our own throats, while the multinational oil companies rake in the cash. You are living in an era, Mike, where reality has be redefined as another scare tactic. Reality may be scary, but ignoring it is scarier. And if you think that the environment is another scare tactic, you weren’t paying attention to that article that Huan Yi was posting about the north polar ice cap. The only reason you feel they aren’t getting any milage about that is that you are pretending that it isn’t real either. Near as I remember, this is a point I came up with on my own. If anyone else thought of it as well, I’m thrilled. Maybe I’m onto something worth thinking about. Calling a discussion point ridiculous without offering anything to back up your claim but the ridicule itself is puffery. If you have actual factual rebuttal, show it; that will enable the world to take the measure of your thinking and to respond to it. Scorn by itself accrues points for style but not substance, and sometimes not for style, either. quote: Mike, the word remains “Democratic.” I see that occasional reminders remain essential. One of the problems with being the suave, sophisticated, urbane monster about town that I am is that people simply cannot believe that there are things I should know that I don’t know. In this case I suspected that a vacation date was probably due simply by the way you began to sputter and growl and bluster. You knew you were making a mountain out of a molehill as both parties do when this sort of this can be used to political advantage. Democrats and Republicans have done it for years, and I wouldn’t be terribly surprised to see it happen in the Roman Senate over 2000 years ago. It’s the privilege of the party in power to fix the agenda and the place of hearings and whether on not bills will actually appear at all. When the Democrats first wanted to investigate some of the events around 9/11 and Abu Grahib (however you spell it) the Republican leadership fixed the hearings in a basement room that hadn’t been cleared of it’s prior furniture, hadn’t been properly set and, and didn’t have a sound system. Woops. Tell me where and which surveys said that the Amnerican people overwhelmingly wanted that bill to pass. You may be right, Mike, it’s simply I haven’t seen that data. As a point of history, the thing that got Custer in trouble at the Little Bighorn was his inept advance, and possibly his splitting of forces. He didn't even beat a hasty retreat because he had no actual place to retreat to. He was massively disrespectful of the capacities of his opponents. He was in such a hurry to inflict hurt that he paid no attention to the safety of his troops, put them into unneeded danger, and got the portion of his command that was with him at the time destroyed. A planned withdrawal might have worked better. Paying attention to the reports from his indian scouts would have helped as well. A hundred and thirty years later and look how far we've come. quote: “Democratic,” Mike. It would be like me going out of my way to say RepublicRat to you if I knew it got under your skin, or to use other language that I knew you felt upset by simply to get your goat. Please don’t do that Mike. It should be enough for you to know that other folks find it offensive. Now, if I had been talking about any of those other people or institutions, it would have been in a different context. We have spoken about Haliburton in several contexts, and should you wish to broaden the discussion into a discussion about abuse of cost-plus contracts, and shifting of corporate status so that a major U.S, defense contractor has found a way to avoid paying withholding and various other taxes required of American companies doing business with the U.S. government, I would be happy to do so. It doesn’t make Haliburton look good and it doesn’t make Dick Cheney look good and it doesn’t make the Republican Party look good. If you could learn to spell Democratic, I might even try it, but I suspect you’re simply trying to change the subject and not talk about what the oil companies are doing in cooperation with the current administration. I’m basically unhappy about what the oil companies have done with any administration in the history of the country, mind you, with the possible exception of Teddy Roosevelt, but I speak with some general ignorance of a lot of the historical development of the oil companies over much of the past hundred years, only some idea of what they’ve been doing over the last sixty or so. Democratic. Bill Gates has put a lot of time and energy into some remarkable charitable projects for quite a while now. He and his wife are fine with me. I don’t know much about Microsoft, being a MAC user by preference. I don’t know how happy the founder of Wal-Mart would be with the company these days. He made his money on running an All-American Company, if you remember, and right proud of it. Sam might think the kids were sharp as tacks or that they’d sold the company and the country down the river. You’re going to say you know more about that than I do, I say you may, but I’m waiting to hear you stick your neck out and say how. I think Sam might have had his doubts about having so many of his workers pull down food stamps and health benefits from the state and county governments. I recall he was against that sort of thing, though he was surely against unions too, and would have done anything he could have to hound any of them out of town. You know I disagreed with him about that. quote: Stuff and nonsense, Mike. The military is littered with the bodies of high ranking flag officers who disagreed with the President and the administration. You seem to be having some memory problems. People told him from the beginning of the war—professional generals, Mike—that he was going about things wrong. If he had listened to them, we would be in a somewhat better situation now. There would have been enough troops for the job, to begin with. My personal opinion is that the job was unnecessary in the first place. I’m simply taking about his rejected competent military advice. The post invasion upheaval would have been handled differently. No torture would have been permitted. Counterinsurgency policy would have been started right off the bat. The list goes on. And you’re upset because Obama says they don’t see entirely eye to eye. Wow. Mike, it’s very late, and this cowpoke has got to punch some beeves in the morning. Or something of that sort. Best to you and everybody there. BobK. Democratic. . . |
||
|
byski Member
since 2006-01-26
Posts 235Alberta, Canada |
Bob K, I do not think that there are any fundamental similarities between the named persons, especially in their beliefs. I do however look at the circumstances that they have found themselves in. Like it or not America is in political and economical turmoil, just as was the case in post WWI Germany. That is the only similarity that I am trying to point out. Citing the references throughout history, when a society reaches this point it must react to the situation or lose control of the people they are trying to preserve. It may be that neither Obama, Clinton or McCain will do anything reactionary, but more than likely some one or some organization will. It could be their successors for all I know, but a solution to the growing problems is not going to come easy. |
||
|
byski Member
since 2006-01-26
Posts 235Alberta, Canada |
Now looking at all this political jargon I will admit that I am nowhere close to being an intellectual buff on this subject. I like to consider myself someone of action. If we could take this forum and the energy that both sides have and put it toward something that will amount to more then just personal attacks on a forum that will most likely be read by less than 1% of the people it affects, I might be happy about it. However this argument has somehow boiled down to a toe to toe stand off where Mr. K feels the need to defend more than enough positions for the rest of us to get his point. I would love to see the topics discussed here to amount to more than just words and personal attacks because it is defiantly something worth reading. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Mr. Byski, quote: Your use of passive voice has proven troublesome for you here, Mr, Byski. It wasn't able to communicate the difference between those persons you named and the persons I named. The persons I named were connected by my somewhat ridiculous sense of humor and my wish to make a point about a construction you used which seemed to me not to be descriptively useful. I offered two examples of how its use generated a sense of underlying meaning and portent when in fact there was only my own often badly judged and ill timed sense of humor there to give it any form at all. While something like this may have guided your selections, I feel that your list of two, Obama and Clinton, if that is in fact what you are talking about here and not my own list, does in fact have some things in common. Perhaps this is why, in your last posting, you chose to add Senator MacCain's name to that list; it would certainly add a late but useful balance to a list composed entirely of Democratic Presidential hopefuls. For two people who you claim to have" no fundamental similarities," it does seem remarkable how easily that phrase seems to come to mind, doesn't it? Being an old political left wing guy, who finds both Senators Clinton and Obama (both are also Senators, I'd overlooked that one) somewhat closer to the right than I personally enjoy, I would say that both are political centrists or even what would in less extreme times be thought of as Rockefeller Republicans. No insult intended to any of the parties mentioned; I respect Rockefeller Republicans, they're simply a bit too far to the right for my tastes for the most part. All of these things amount to fundamental similarities to my mind. That said, I am not unmindful of the actual danger of an extreme right wing take-over of the government in this country. To mind, I am very much afraid the damage has already been done by the current administration, by the recent Republican power in congress and by the noodle spined Democratic response, which should have taken a stand for civil liberties here and abroad. Even should the Democrats will office all around, I am by no means sure they will have the courage to put down the tools the Republicans have voted into being and which the Democrats, for fear of appearing weak on terror have approved. Mr Bysky, it is not a pleasant situation before us. I'm unclear what the Gold Standard has to do with the situation. I know you seem fond of the point, but I don't believe that economics actually works that way. I do understand your comment about adulterating and debasing the money supply, and I believe that a currency can in fact be attacked. I also believe that you are confusing inflation with hyperinflation, and that you do your point little good by not understanding and addressing the difference if, in fact, the economic approach is important to you. I'd like to hear what your thinking is on this. It's not that I dislike scoring points in a discussion, but I'd much rather build some sort of common understanding of what's going on. In the long run, it's more important to have people you can talk with and exchange ideas with than beat about the head and shoulders with any spare notions you have laying around the tool bench with the wrenches in the garage. If you don't want me defending positions, why not approach the whole thing as if it were a discussion with a friend instead of what seems, on this end, to be an attack on a party of which I have made no secret of being a member? Surely you might have expected a Democrat to have risen to a discussion where one of the key elements was a cartoon snarly face and another was a sentence using two Democratic Senators, both of whom had been in the Primary race for President and one of which was the Party Nominee, and linking them with Adolf Hitler in a highly problematic fashion? How surprised can you really be? I mean, really? Sincerely, Mr. K. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Back at you, Mike. Yes. You are willing to punish the U.N. for its corruption which is not essentially different than that of the U.S. Government, The Democratic Party or even your own much beloved Republican party Yes, Bob, I am. First because I do believe that iti s different than that of the U.S. government and second, because they are on a global scale. This was the organization to end war, the organization to band together and force any future Hitlers, Mussolinis or whatever to shut down. This was the band of merry men, the one for all and all for one answer to world peace. This is the organization that put terrorist regimes, like Libya, on the security council, the organization that has done nothing in regards to the massacres of millions of civilians in various countries, the organization that has turned their eyes away from the deaths, sufferings, obliteration of human rights and atrocities committed since it's inception, which they swore to protect. Do I think that is different? Yes, I do. I realize that a democrat would consider the evil US government corrupt. They say it enough... Should you care to offer specifics about any of those situations, it would be an interesting discussion, Ah, Bob, this is a topic I could write for hours about, which I don't have and which would bore you, even if I did. I consider the democratic leader to be despicable human beings. I can think of no one in my life that I have encountered that I have respected less. They have been one one single crusade for the past eight years.....get Bush. It has been more than political, It has been personal. They have done everything possible to bring him down, calling for investigations without merit, using the press to smear him whenever possible, pointing fingers at him over everything wrong in the world,etc etc etc. They smeared him for the soldiers' actions at AbuGhrab, in the same fashion one would attack the CEO of Burger King because an employee spilled a coke on a customer. They screamed and demanded investigations over the proposed sale of ports to Dubai, claiming that Bush was putting the security of the country at risk by allowing foreign powers port ownership, completely ignoring the fact that foreign ownership of US ports exceed 60% of our ports. They demanded investigations of port ownerships, however, since the sale was cancelled due to their rants and manipulations of the press, they have never done anything about all of those other foreign ownerships. They went after his service record, while having a candidate with no service record at all and a past president who left the country and gave anti-US speeches in another country. They went after his college record and drinking charges, ignoring that they have a candidate who admits to using drugs and a past president who did also but "never inhaled". They went after his surveillance tactics, although the vast majority of Americans agreed with them. They went after the dismissal of federal lawyers, even the figures were less than those of their past president. They have done their best to portray America as a land of gloom and despair, ruined by the Bush administration. Have they had anything positive to say? No. During the past several years that the economy was healthy and setting records for things such as low unemployment rates and higher earnings, did they acknowledge them? No. I used to even try to goad the democrats here with "What about the -IT'S ABOUT THE ECONOMY, STUPID - slogans the Democrats used to chant? Where are they now?" Not one democrat responded. They had nothing to say, since the economy was in good shape. Now that it has turned for the worse, the Democrats are back with their slogans. Have they hd anything positive to say about anything good happening in Iraq? No, but they will be sure to get the newspapers to highlight anything bad. What has been good for America has been bad for them. They are not interested in the good of America, any positivity at all - they are only interested in portraying America as a disaster, thanks to George Bush. They get people like Jennifer to rant about more wars, more torture, more killing, more of our money in big oil’s pockets, more of our troops coming home in body bags, more debt, more cronyism, more failed foreign policy, more of our freedoms and rights down the tube, more losing their jobs, their homes, while more no bid contracts keep on filling Bush and Cheney’s Carlyle/Haliburton coffers The Democrats have been interested in nothing more than to present to the citizenship, and the world, that the Uinted States is a disaster (beacuse they are not in charge). They have given more aid and comfort to the enemy than anyone else could ever do with their constant attacks on the administration. They do not care about America. They only care about America if they are in power and they will trash it if they are not. Nancy Pelosi said, "Put us in charge in congress and we will clean out the swamp". She has done nothing, except add to whatever swamp she referred to with her own investigations and misgivings. She has managed to give Congress their worst rating in history. They don't want to really DO anything. They just want to be in charge. The power is the only thing that matters to them and they will trash anyone, anything and even the country to achieve their goals. Specifics, Bob? I could wallpaper your house with specifics. They have done nothing but attack for eight years, to the point that they have turned Americans off....and they don't even realize it. They do nothing but shoot themselves in the foot and make themselves look foolish doing it. They have lowered the image of America in the eyes of the world with their constant frivolous attacks and they have done it intentionally. In my opinion, they are not deserving of the respect I give a cockroach before I squish it. I hope I've made my feelings clear enough. And if you think that the environment is another scare tactic, you weren’t paying attention to that article that Huan Yi was posting about the north polar ice cap. I didn't see anything in that article that related to oil spills or man-made environmental disasters, which is the spin the democrats have tried using. The military is littered with the bodies of high ranking flag officers who disagreed with the President and the administration and which is Obama, the president or the administration? He goes to Iraq, speaks to the general in charge who has more military ability in his pinkie than Obama could ever hope to have, and comes away saying they have differences. He also claimed the surge didn't work, of course, even though it is accepted by every fact and figure that it did. Does that scare me? Oh, yes... as I've said before, Bob, we are just spinning our wheels, with little hope of changing the other's point of view. You don't need to respond to anything I've said here but there is one thing I'd appreciate your doing. Go through your day and point out all the the things wrong with America as it is today. No political talking points, no opinions from political pundits - just you and your day and what you see. Walk down the street, into the stores, maybe a restaurant, watch the people, look at the clean streets, maybe a cop car going by once in a while, and tell me what's wrong with the country, tell me about this "horrible" state we are in and about the "erosion of our human rights" you experience and tell me about this great "change" we must have to keep us from going down the tubes. I'd appreciate your views on this. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Mike, I think that the best thing for me to do here is actually take some time and look around and take your suggestion. My temptation is to reply to the the comments you offer about Democrats and the Democratic perspective, but I'll put that aside, spend some time walking and looking around. You should understand that Elaine and I live a literal two minute walk from Beverly Hills and we are cheek by jowl with Hollywood. It'd be nice if we could afford to buy here instead of simply renting. So the response you'll get will necessarily be a bit on the skewed side simply because this is an area a bit rich for our blood. But yours is a fair request and deserves a fair response. I'll give it a shot. Affectionately, Bob Kaven |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Thank you, Bob. Ideally, you would be living in a small town in the midwest or anywhere else for that matter but I'll accept whatever you offer, even if it does come from fantasyland I'm sure you have an interesting life there with quite a collection of stories you could tell... As you go through the day, please remember the story of the traveler meeting an old man sitting alongside the road and asking about the town ahead. The old man told him that it was a miserable town, where the people were rude, insulting and offensive and he would hate it there. Shortly thereafter another traveler wandered up to the old man and asked him the same question. "It's a wonderful town", the old man replied. "The people are warm, friendly and very obliging. You will love it there." Both travelers found the town to be exactly the way the old man described it. |
||
|
byski Member
since 2006-01-26
Posts 235Alberta, Canada |
I almost regret bringing forward my arguments now, since this has turned into something of keeping tabs on the numbers that I present. In my best efforts, I did not try to put together an argument supported by dates and numbers but rather I tried to highlight some fundamental beliefs that seem quite obvious. No, there is no hyperinflation that exists in the world today, but are you comfortable in the fact that there will not be some sort of economical force that wipes out the middle class in America? For this I have no arguments that you would consider valid, either than the nation is almost sub prime with paying off all the debt that it has accumulated in the past four terms. The working force entering America cannot support the health care bill as well as cover the retiring baby boomers, just from sheer numbers. The American dollar is a toxic currency and combined with the improving future of outside investors I feel that the future of America is bleak indeed. My arguments are not meant to be dissected and ridiculed or even political for that matter, rather to make all sides of the argument think in new ways. To you the Democratic party may seem centralist in their platforms, but can you not agree that to the rest of the world this is still staunch conservationism? In the global scheme of things this covers a narrow point of the political spectrum, and either way that you look at it it needs a fundamental change. What will the next generation think of times like these? How are they going to respond when they are handed this mess of economics and said "here, fix it"? You may not agree with my opinions and surly you will throw your own out with hard fact to back them up, I just want you to take a step back and try to see this situation without your current perspective. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Mr. Byski, I have difficulty responding to your posting here. I don't think that wanting to have the kind of feeling criticism you speak of offering put in terms of facts and hard reality is unreasonable on my part. Nor do I wish to discount the importance of listening to and paying attention to the sort of issues you put voice to for me either. I think, in fact, that both are obligations of civil discourse. People interested in political and civic issues need to hear each other out, both ways. If you feel I am selling you short, you have a real reason to be upset. You should be able to expect that from me, even if we are from different countries. It's part of defining yourself as civilized by any reasonable (that word again) standard. I believe that I am obligated to at least try to think things through in speaking with you and other people. This doesn't mean that I am right, only that I feel I have a reasonable (again) point and perspective to offer. I should be able to tell the people I am talking with what I've based my opinions on. That includes facts and figures, honestly come by and honestly offered, with the reservations that I have about these things laid out. I don't want to undermine my own position in talking about things by overstating my reservations about my own various thoughts; but I don't want to pretend that I'm monolithic in my sense of rightness, either. I am interested in your beliefs and thoughts, but I want to know where you get them and why you think the way you do. Common sense is not enough to my particular way of thinking. Nobody obligates you to comply with my somewhat oddball thought processes, though. Should you actually want to have a discussion with me as best as the two of us can manage it, I will ask about such things and expect to be asked about them in return, respectfully as possible, because it's always helpful to be talking about the same reality. That's one of the reason's facts and research are helpful; so everybody understands what the reality is that's under discussion. Talk gets very frustrating when you think you're talking about the same thing and it turns out you're not. It's the old apples and pears business from math class. Obvious and fundamental beliefs have a nasty way of changing on you when you aren't looking. That's when it's not enough to accept them at face value most of the time in a serious discussion. If it's just me and my like minded pals, we all share the same assumptions to start out with; how likely is it we're going to figure out that running around wearing white sheets and burning crosses on other folks' lawns is not a rational policy statement? Not very, he said, hastily answering his own question. quote: No, I'm not. In fact I think that since the 2000 election that process has been more or less steadily under way. I believe the current economic policies of the U.S. government may well destroy the middle classes in the United States, or at least bring them back to where they were before F.D.R. took office in 1932. The far right wing in this country seems to have been trying to undo the new deal and the various pieces of social and economic progress that have come out of it since FDR died. It seems that the efforts have accelerated since the election of Ronald Reagan. I am very frightened about the potential economic and social collapse of this country as a result of the conservative government in the country since that time. In my more upset moments, I believe it may even be likely. If I've given you cause to think otherwise, I'm very sorry. These are in fact my views. I would like to point out to you that as much as you would wish your views would not be ridiculed and dissected, and as much as you believe they are not political, you overlook an important point of reality here. It is completely separate from your rightness or wrongness. (I agree with you about some things, not about others, in case you wondered.) The point of reality I raise is simply this: Once the words leave your mouth, you lose complete control over how people react to them. You can hope they won't be wretched to you personally, I know I hold that hope, but they are basically free to make whatever response to what may be considered political discourse as they deem politic. They deem broadly indeed. I would suggest to you that this is yet one more reason to be careful that you try to confine yourself as much as possible to actual fact which you can use solid research to back up. Facts are not impossible to slime, but they tend to be more resilient. quote: In do in fact agree. The neoconservatives have managed the political dialogue in this country from quite a number of years. They have done some very funny things with the English Language. They have managed to convince the American public that The Democratic Party is a group of flaming Left Wing nut-jobs when it is probably—in world wide terms—nothing more than a slightly right of center Party with an attempt to include some members of labor (hardly a respectable Labour Party in English Terms, for example; ours is far too much to the right) but also many business people and business interests as well. The Degree to which the Democrats have been able to be quiet about health care reform alone, for example, is shocking to anybody who would believe them anything approaching Left Wing status. Our neoconservatives, on the other hand, are very close to the nazis of the thirties. They are friendly with the Right wing in Italy and in almost everyplace else where there is what most places would consider a fascist or extreme right wing government. I suspect that's why Bush could look Putin in the eye and see a soul mate. Not that Putin is so much a communist as he is a very far right wing oligarch, almost a czar, I would imagine, at the head of a new Russian Empire. The two boys are brothers. It's gotten fairly late for me here, but I thought I owed you at least this much of a response. Hope all is well with you. Bob K. |
||
|
byski Member
since 2006-01-26
Posts 235Alberta, Canada |
Dear Bob, Thank you for your to the point response. It is one of my shortcomings to not be able to take criticism as quickly as I can give it out, so I thank you for understanding me. Since we have been talking about what can affect perspective I feel obliged to give you a sense of where I come from. I am currently 22 years old, graduated out of technical college last year and just starting to get a taste of what the real world is like. But have no fear, things are going well as they can. I grew up with an extremely fortunate set of circumstances, but because of the proximity of my home to those who were not so well off I have a sort of pessimistic view of the political structure. I can spend hours pointing out the folly of social security programs and how they effect a hand to mouth kind of existence. I can also spend an even longer time as to how this continent we live in is the most fortunate to have since I am taking advantage of many of those programs and advantages. By default I understand that everything that I have to say, even if it is not my intention, can have its political spin on it. But, and this is in my humble personal opinion, the real issues that affect our day to day lives are not being addressed with the care that it needs to be. CO2 emissions are a global threat, why is it that only 2 billion dollars are spent on the environmental program when 80 billion is spent on Iraq (2007). Why is it that in Canada alone the entire MasterCard debt divided over each man, women and child is over $20,000 (2006, Canada Revenue Agency)? I am concerned for the facts presented but the thing that I am most concerned about cannot truly be expressed in fact. When I turned 18 and received the right to vote, the right that generations of men and women have died for and continue to die for to protect, only 12% of first time voters in Canada actually voted. That does not even do service to the fact that many young people do not even know who is representing them in the political system on all three levels (Municipal, Provincial, Federal). The fact that I am most concerned about is since there is such political and economical crisis in the world, most people my age life in the now not caring about their future. This can have indirect links to the rising number of teen suicides, teens starting smoking and exponential growth of drug use. I agree with you that debate is necessary for the growth of our society, wholeheartedly. But what good does this speech do when no one is listening. I am concerned for the future because people my age see that the system in place does not work, and therefore they plan to manipulate it or destroy it. Now, I do not mean to generalize all young people of this generation, there any many things to be thought fondly of and to be hopeful for. But if only 10% of this generation would feel as strongly as I do, or half as strong as you do, there would be great changes indeed. Speculation, generalization yes. But I am merely a poet, a small voice in an overwhelming blaze of static noise. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
But Mr. Byski, you are a poet that makes perfectly good sense. I'll try to get back in a day or two, but your sense seems obvious. The question remains, I suspect, how does a guy talk about it, and what is the audience that needs to hear what's being said? How does a guy reach them? Best from L.A., Bob Kaven |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
http://www.spiegel.de/img/0,1020,1285545,00.jpg |
||
|
byski Member
since 2006-01-26
Posts 235Alberta, Canada |
I would like to say anyone and everything and do anything you can, but that is ridiculous. I also will need to spend some time to think about a useful answer, since I can see that we share a same worry for that problem. The answer is not going to be an easy one. |
||
|
threadbear Senior Member
since 2008-07-10
Posts 817Indy |
This kind of post, with its overworked Hitler/Germany theme (snore)is exactly the kind of post-and-run posts that used to be on Yahoo blogs beneath news stories. Both Left & Right did it. It resulted in Yahoo eventually eleminating ALL Yahoo blogs because people couldn't keep their posts civil and because posters too often went for the 'cheap dig.' I'm just saying .... |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Mr. Threadbear, I thought that the thread ended on a remarkable note of understanding. Perhaps I'm missing something that seems obvious to you and that you'd care to point out. I agree that Hitler's name is greatly overused, especially by people who have no idea of the history or the politics of that time. Yours, Bob Kaven |
||
|
threadbear Senior Member
since 2008-07-10
Posts 817Indy |
I was trying to make the point to Jaime that any attempted connection to Hitler misses the whole point of what 60,000,000 people died for. Was not commenting on the whole thread. Thanks! |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. The one thing that I don’t care for is the prospect of four years of the charge of racism being thrown out in response to criticism. I wouldn’t expect that with Powell but we’ve already seen it with Obama. . |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Huan Yi, Following the use that the neo-cons made of Powell's sense of loyalty through Bush's first term, I suspect that it will be a while before you'll get him to trust the party again. It's a pity. I think he would have made a better candidate than McCain. I would have been pleased either way with an election between Powell and Obama; though, being a Democrat and a Liberal, I have a clear preference for Obama. With Powell, I would have felt that the man was actively bending all his efforts to the good of the country. I think of him in somewhat the same way that I thought of Ike, many disagreements but basic respect. As for Senator Obama, I hear you bringing up racism and attributing it to him. It's a fact in the country and will affect the way the the election will play out. How much, I don't know. In the same way, Governor Palin has mentioned sexism, It too is an issue that will affect things one way or another; no use complaining about that, either. I'm basically fond of Obama, though I wish he were a bit more clearly to the left of where he is. Senator McCain has been supporting the economics and foreign policy of the current folks for the whole time Bush has been in office, voting with the party 90-95% of the time. His claims that it's time for big changes in the way regulations are enforced on Wall Street ring hollow. He could have shown his independence any time over the past eight years and voted against this mess, but he's simply gone along. Why believe this rhetoric now? But you see things differently. Best to you, Huan Yi. Bob Kaven |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
I am not aware of the Investor Business Daily as being politically biased so I offer this excerpt from them.. http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=302137342405551 |
||
|
threadbear Senior Member
since 2008-07-10
Posts 817Indy |
The thing that irritates me about Obama is his feeble attempts to reach the 'middle' while he is clearly to the Far-Left from a policy standpoint and from a voting record. I am a firm believer that NEITHER presidential candidate should be from the far left or right. A person that far out 1) doesn't compromise, ever 2) lies to get to the 'middle' when beneficial 3) cannot see anyone else's point of view 4) tends to be ideological instead of pragmatic. These attempts to paint McCain, who is clearly a middle-of-the road Republican, as a BUSH CLONE is so misguided. On the same token, Obama has gotten a pass, completely, on being a closet(?) socialist and a redistributor of wealth from the press and attack ads. Doesn't figure. One is far left, the other is middle-right, yet only McCain gets slammed for being too far one way or another. The telling stat: only 6% of folks polled thought Obama was a 'Liberal.' How can a person that far left NOT be called a liberal? Boggles the mind how uninformed voters can be. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Threadbear, You accept to quickly. While the data shows that Obama is the most liberal of the senators, there are some things it doesn't show. It doesn't show the accuracy of the scale measuring right and left, for example. To anybody with a history of observation of the country's politics over the past 50 years, the things that Obama is being called an extremist for suggesting were accepted as middle of the road or only slightly left of center even by a broad range of Republicans not so very long ago. What is being accepted as McCain being a middle of the road Republican today, in many areas of the country 50 years ago you have gotten him roundly condemned as being, to put it kindly, very far to the right extreme of the spectrum. Certainly his approval of torture and willingness to approve of this administrations efforts at and success in accomplishing the bypass of congressional controls on presidential powers would have caused considerable outrage by the congress that threw Richard Nixon out of office for doing considerably less. Might I also remind you that over-all, the Senator has voted with the administration on 90-95% of the legislation it's put forward. While Obama may be listed as the #1 Liberal in the Senate, the same organization that issued that rating on Senator OBama found itself unable to rate McCain at all, because he had missed more than half the votes needed to get a rating in the first place. McCain was, in other words, looking out for McCain, while Obama was looking out for Obama plus being a Senator as well. I could go on, but it's late and I go on too much anyway. And Balladeer, I didn't particularly like what the article said, but they've got a right to say it, and I don't know that they're biased. They just disagree with me. Not the same thing. As long as I figure they're not cooking the books, they can disagree away, and I'll listen unhappily away. I reserve the right to an occasional throaty growl, but then you do as much yourself, sometimes. No harm. Best to you both. Bob Kaven |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Throaty growls are always acceptable, Bob |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
