That's what governments are for- get in a man's way...what's so hard to understand here?
POSTED BY: chrisisall
UPDATED: Thursday, April 10, 2008 21:15
VIEWED: 4817
PAGE 2 of 6
Quote:Kirk, your whole post was golden.
Originally posted by Kirkules:
I'm not anti-government, I'm anti-BIG government.
:smokin':Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Is it possible that this society might just get a major overhaul...I don't wanna implode.
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
And once you understand this concept, this cycle, you'll realize why I cannot support any authoritarian society - because it simply will not endure, all such societies are temporary in nature and eventually implode with great destruction.
Jayneisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You slimed me.
Originally posted by Hero:
Thats just the kinda question I'd expect from an anti-American-pinko-Commie-anarchist.
Venkmanisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:You know I don’t think that anyone here has ever argued that there aren’t flaws in the system. I think what some of us are sick of are the arguments that preclude any disagreement. If I had said what you suggest, the only thing some, including maybe you, would have read was “We have [ignored] the best system that can be devised [some such other words and stuff summarily dismissed],” followed by the inevitable response that I’m an arrogant American and a lackey of the Bush administration.
Originally posted by chrisisall:
What's wrong with saying "We have about the best system that can be devised to work on such a large scale, yet it still contains many flaws that may be worked out over time, with the proper attention & action."???
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
You slimed me.
No. I think if you read my entire post you'll find that I'm drawing a distinct difference between yourself and your "liberal anarchist Commie-Pinko Baby-eating motives-in-question drunk-driver buddies".
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yeah, just goin' with the Ghostbusters thing...
Originally posted by Hero:Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
You slimed me.
No. I think if you read my entire post you'll find that I'm drawing a distinct difference between yourself and your "liberal anarchist Commie-Pinko Baby-eating motives-in-question drunk-driver buddies".
H
Staypuftisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:It's the "Earth is round" effect. It's difficult for some (including me) to argue something we believe so fiercely in a way that allows for the possibility that we're wrong...pizza is the best food, Bush is a bad President, the Earth is round, period, no discussion except for you to agree.
Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal:
I think what some of us are sick of are the arguments that preclude any disagreement.
The torture thing was what pushed me to that point. I RESENT that MY President would sink as low as the 'bad' guys here...this let me know that he's too big a fan of 24, and (IMO) thinks on a much more simplistic level than I'd previously imagined. Like Whitewater- it can't be reasonably argued- it's just wrong. Again, IMO.
One thing though, I don't fault (or care, even) peeps here for bashing Clinton for his many flaws, why do you take such umbrage in the case of the present administration? It's like y'all take it personally or something.
Quote:Seriously, I'm not perfectly clear on that part of your post, but I wouldn't call you a lackey in ANY case.
If I had said what you suggest, the only thing some, including maybe you, would have read was “We have [ignored] the best system that can be devised [some such other words and stuff summarily dismissed],” followed by the inevitable response that I’m an arrogant American and a lackey of the Bush administration.
The admittedly flawed Chrisisall
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
This seems like a good place to start... Hello, all. Chrisisall, I would suggest the reason many people become incensed over statements that "bash" the current President is that he IS the current president. Some are uncomfortable with what is seen as undermining the credibility of a reigning President "in the face of the enemy" as it were, and I think there are sound historical examples of that, particularly in the sense that it betrays a petty weakness that encourages and informs the activity of some very upsetting and explosive people. A certain level of criticism is only reasonable, but personal attacks and language verging on treason against a sitting Executive are unacceptable... to many. By contrast, bash the hell out of whoever you want the moment they release the burden of office.
It's like having a fist-fight with your CO in the middle of a fire-fight; you're likely to get everyone killed. If you have a problem with his command style, and you both get out alive, you take him aside later and explain your viewpoint with the strong, honest voice that speaks from your pummelling fists, but in private where nobody can see the division between you. This, of course, seems like an "Earth is Round" point for me. However, that's not a very good name for it, seeing as for thousands of years it was quite obvious, except to the gifted elite, that the Earth was flat and riding on a tortoise or a cosmic aardvark or some such. It took the practical mathematics of Eratosthenes to demonstrate otherwise, and most people, if they thought about it at all, STILL thought it was God's cow-pattie for hundreds of years. So as a synonym for "obvious and unworthy of refutation," "the Earth is round" is somewhat lacking. I would suggest perhaps "LightBringer has pissed someone off today."
This may all be a dream, but at least mine's been consistently erotic. -LB
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"Some are uncomfortable with what is seen as undermining the credibility of a reigning President "in the face of the enemy" as it were, and I think there are sound historical examples of that, particularly in the sense that it betrays a petty weakness that encourages and informs the activity of some very upsetting and explosive people."
So, did you have similar reservations about the Clinton impeachment ?
***************************************************************
Speaking of round - what goes around ...
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Actually, I found the Clinton impeachment rather frivolous. Sure, he lied under oath and all, but I have to admit that while there have been things I've been untruthful about in my time, prevaricating about whether or not you got a hummer in your (read "the people's") office does not mean you would lie about more life-and-death matters concerning the security of the country. Impeachment, on the other hand, is carried out under the legal power of the legislature itself, and I do think it is the duty and province of the separated powers to police each other. Simply put, if the legislature agreed to do it, at some level we all did, just as is the case with the Iraq War. There's a place where "us and them" has to stop and become "we." I didn't particularly favor the war or Clinton's impeachment at the time, but I accept them as having been my doing, as I am a voting citizen. But to your point, Clinton was never seen as a war-time President; that doesn't mean that fighting wasn't going on in Somalia or elsewhere, but it wasn't the sort of thing in which your enemies are a power bloc that draws strength and propaganda from your internecine bickering. An excellent example would be Harry Reed's announcement that the "war is lost." I could happily have strangled the man for uttering such a sniveling, self-serving, and cowardly statement at such a crucial time. There's a man ripe for an impeachment. Two points: A) I'll accept that statement from someone who actually put their butt on the line, but not a politician who wouldn't know a lost war if it came up and lobbied him, B) It doesn't matter whether the statement is true or not; but it may be that if enough people believe it, it will become true.
This may be all a dream, but at least mine's been consistently erotic -LB
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME