Top Ten Reasons John Ensign Should Resign

POSTED BY: OPPYH
UPDATED: Saturday, October 3, 2009 21:54
VIEWED: 25942
PAGE 8 of 31

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT PAGE

KWICKO

Thursday, June 11, 2009 11:56 PM

Okay, NOW I'm caught up. I think.

KWICKO

Friday, June 12, 2009 12:57 AM

Quote:
And finally, you don't want captured terrorists being given Miranda rights overseas, like Obama said on 60 Minutes he'd never do, but has now indeed ordered?

Jongs, any kind of cite to back up this claim that Obama ordered this?

Reason I ask is, the only references I can find to Miranda being read to some terror suspects is that Bush ordered it back in July 2008. I'm sure you can prove that wrong, though, with your oh-so-superior intelligence and reliance on facts instead of talking points.

Right?

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

"You're a idiot." -AuRaptor, RWED, May 27, 2009.

FREMDFIRMA

Friday, June 12, 2009 3:09 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
Frem: Had to actually look that up.

Well... It does pretty much sound like my perspective, yeah. I put a lot of focus on the community, in how everyone has some intrinsic worth, and how people do better both progressively and emotionally when they help each other, as opposed to isolationism. I like the idea of breaking down the walls between people. I think measurements of economic worth (class and hierarchy) are just another means of dividing one person from another, and that hurts everybody, because that breeds desensitization, a lack of empathy, and crime. It enables corruption.

But I'm not sure how far you can go making private property community owned. On one hand even though private property and materialism can be a motivating factor for progress, it's an empty one. On the other, you start taking about forcibly taking from people because they should SHARE it, and you start treading dangerous ground.

Ah, but that's the beauty of it, nestled in there quite firmly is something called the Non-Aggression Principle, as in never *forcing* anyone to do anything - to do otherwise violates the whole concept and reduces it all to "meet the new boss, same as the old boss", and many folk like me are just plain damn tired of that little game.

It's why I don't get on well with a lot of other Anarchists though, see, the whole "throw down the established order" concept is not only completely moronic, it's hypocritical, and you cannot FORCE an ideology on folk who don't want it, nor should you!

If it worked at all, it'd wind up like Biafra, Somalia, Haiti, just mad chaos and a whirlwind of violence as new factions scrabbled for power.

We don't need to throw down the established order, just outgrow any need or want for it, cause the whole of their power rests upon the fools that take their orders - without which the "powers that be" are in fact utterly powerless.

In short, the essence of this form of Anarchism is "And I should listen to you, exactly... why ?"

On the other hand, realistically you DO have people who take the orders and cling to the masters leg not out of fear, dependance or ignorance, but out of malice, greed, and hatred of their fellow man, and entirely by their own choice, hell, look at the obvious gleeful sadism of most agents of the established order, from obstructive bureaucrats who enjoy lording their power over you, to police who laugh as they abuse you, to the happy shiny faces of our "troops" (which I do NOT support) as they torture and murder...

Those beings, in my eyes, have voluntarily surrendered any claim to humanity, to personhood, because to have it at all is to respect that of others and in their sociopathic selfs there is not, and never will be, any such thing - I don't need to dehumanise them, they've done so to themselves, of their own free will, chosen to become what they are.

The Enemy.

As such, I have absolutely zero regard for them as people cause they're no such thing, they could be - if they wanted to, but they preferred and actively chose savagery, at which point they become just an obstacle, worthy of no more regard than a piece of litter you shove out of the way in order to continue your journey.

I know that might sound cold, but consider that in keeping with the non-aggression principle, what has to happen *first* for me to act violently against them...

Anyhows, folk like that are damn rare, most of those takin orders are doing it out of fear, dependance and ignorance, all of which can be fixed - and as for the savages, well, once we quit *creating* them in a society that still creates very few true sociopaths despite it being designed and structured to do so, that problem fixes itself.

That's not idealism even - look at our society, public schools, mass media, and still, STILL, children choose their humanity - we like to call it a mental disorder, try to medicate it, ship em off to the friggin camps (but not for much longer!

) and so on and so forth - but what that really is amounts

OPPYH

Friday, June 12, 2009 3:10 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

If only John McCain had followed your example. What was it he called Chelsea? "Ugly as a mud fence"? I must have missed your righteous indignation over that comment. How would you like it if he referred to YOUR daughter as "ugly as a mud fence"? What if *I* called her that?

Mike

May not be the prettiest on the planet but she has one kicking bikini body.

I'd nail that "mud fence" any day of the week.

R-Rated Chelsea

KWICKO

Friday, June 12, 2009 3:23 AM

Oh, horrors! She's ghastly.

Oh, I was wrong about the "ugly as a mud fence" quip. What McCain actually said was "You know why Chelsea Clinton is so ugly? Because Janet Reno is her father."

Classy guy, Ol' John.

Mike

Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day...
Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

BYTEMITE

Friday, June 12, 2009 3:23 AM

I mostly figure violence isn't necessary at all for a revolution. I figure that these people are eventually going to ruin themselves, and as they try harder and harder to hold on to what they have, the more it's going to slip away. They'll think they can sell off their extra stuff, just for a little more seed money, just an investment for them to start over, but no, no, that'll end up gone too. And soon, they will be the same as the rest of us, on equal ground, and once that happens the new system can be established. No taking needed, just the natural process of attrition of the system they've built that they themselves don't understand.

FREMDFIRMA

Friday, June 12, 2009 5:49 AM

Ayep, like holding a handful of sand, the tighter you squeeze, the more slips right through your fingers...

Although, knowing as much history as I do, when those powers that be DO fall to earth, it's gonna be less than pleasant for em - about all they can hope for it that it'll be quick, yanno ?

Not that I feel exactly sorry for em and all, but one of the things we've prepared for is trying to limit the carnage of WHEN that happens so that it don't become a feeding frenzy and cause more needless destruction than needs be.

Barbour looked at the door. Unwilling to speak but unable to help himself, he said, "Did you have to do that? They were asleep!"
The Widow frowned at him. "What does that matter?" she said. "It's better that they're dead, surely?"
Robert Barbour looked at her in sudden epiphany.
For the first time in his life he realized that there really were people who should better be dead.
It gave meaning to his life.
The Sharp End; David Drake.
Pg 315.

-F

BIGDAMNNOBODY

Friday, June 12, 2009 11:44 AM

Nice to see this site is status quo.
It's not like this thread was started to bash Obama. This thread was a swipe at a late night talk show host who showed terrible judgment. But because Letterman's quip was regarding the Palin family, we have the usual suspects rushing to his defence. Even though most of you probably don't even watch the show.
We have Signy digging up quotes from 'conservatives' playing the old but he said card as if that somehow lessens the poor taste of this 'joke'.
We have Rue come out of retirement to stand up for Letterman because he said something derogatory about the Palin's.
We have Kwicko bringing up McCain quotes as if that has anything to do with the topic at hand. Once again, because McCain called Chelsea ugly, it is okay for Letterman to joke about getting a 14 year old girl knocked up. Doesn't fly with me, besides, Signy already beat you to it.
We find Mr. Isall arguing that it is okay because Sarah Palin was once duped by some radio comedians. She wasn't the first nor will she be the last one to fall for that particular prank. But I guess that means she is a simpleton who must be mocked along with her family.

I guess if we all just agreed that Letterman showed bad judgment, this would have been a very short thread.

KWICKO

Friday, June 12, 2009 11:55 AM

Quote:
...it is okay because Sarah Palin was once duped by some radio comedians. She wasn't the first nor will she be the last one to fall for that particular prank. But I guess that means she is a simpleton who must be mocked along with her family.

Well at least we can all agree that she's a simpleton who should be mocked! Thanks for clearing that up.

HERO

Friday, June 12, 2009 12:17 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
The comment also did not express an actual factual occurrence. And it also did not express a LACK OF consent. Bristol is 18; if she says "no", it's rape. The comment makes no mention of her saying "no". Hence, no rape, no rape joke.

It was a rape joke because the joke was about the 14 year old since she was the one who was in NY and at the ball park.

It may have been a mistake on Letterman's part, in fact its likely and lets assume it was in fact meant to be aimed at Bristol.

If you intend to shoot one person in the leg and your bullet hits another person in the head by accident (wrong place, wrong time), your still guilty of shooting a person in the head.

In this case Letterman intended to make a sexual joke about Bristol and instead hit Willow, he's still guilty of making a sexual joke about Willow (and the momment he misfired on Willow, his joke about sexual conduct became a joke about rape).

It was a risky joke and it blew up in his face, he should be fired, just like Imus.

H

"Hero. I have come to respect you"- Chrisisall, 2009.

PREV PAGE 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 NEXT PAGE