IC Forum Archive

veen · Posts: 131

dhex wrote:

um, i don't know if you're aware of this, but mr. hitchens background is trotskyite.

so he's more going along with the team. I must admit I'm ignorant of his background, I was just basing my ideas on a variety of pieces of his I've read in past, and his stance on current events, which seemed completely incongruent. trotskyism has never made sense to me either, so this should've been expected.

dhex wrote:

the people who make liberals out to be poor babes in the woods are just daydreaming themselves a nice blameless politic - everyone knows how to work an angle at this point.

I don't disagree. I was more talking about the average, powerless liberal, who make the mistake of assuming the same ideology in their party's leaders and representatives.

LW Joestar · Posts: 1358

It's going to be funny when a republican wins in 2008 and everyone starts to realize that the real, functional, adult world is tired of your crap.

veen · Posts: 131

LW Joestar wrote:

It's going to be funny when a republican wins in 2008 and everyone starts to realize that the real, functional, adult world is tired of your crap.

yes, because history has proven, time and again, that the real functional adults among us make the best decisions.

and who better than dubya to exemplify what it means to lead a real functional adult life!

why am I even bothering. just keep watching television and believing everything's right with the world.

dhex · Posts: 2963

one of the problems with manicheanism is that it is reflexively reductionist; everyone assumes that their enemies are not only their mirrored opposites, but are indeed motivated solely by evil (be it sloth or wrath).

it's a bad habit.

Crazy Bacon Lips · Posts: 783

The Republicans won't win in 2008, for better or for worse. Unfortunately, the liberal "anti-mob" has become a mob of its own, and will likely plow over any conservative opposition through whatever means necessary, even if that means pretending to be conservative. It kind of offends me that whenever people think "liveral", they automatically envision Cindy Sheehan and those annoying smelly anarchist kids who put out just as much bullshit propaganda as the people they oppose. It may be common, but it's no less common than conservative stereotypes.

Oh, and a lot of the real adults who live in the real world oppose George Bush. I'm not sure, but I think it was, what, nearly half of the voting populace? Correct me if I'm wrong.

About your Comedy Central comment: clever, but when the best source for logical political opinion is a fucking fake news show, something is very wrong, and it's not the American people.

Guardian FINAL · Posts: 1137

Crazy Bacon Lips wrote:

About your Comedy Central comment: clever, but when the best source for logical political opinion is a fucking fake news show, something is very wrong, and it's not the mental condition of the general populace.

I love The Daily Show, but this observation really does sum it all up.

Anyway, I didn't mean to create a political thread, guys. I knew it would become one, but I just wanted to blow steam about Bush's manipulative comic book language. I don't know if that's an apology or what. No harm in good argument among intelligent people, I guess.

Guardian FINAL · Posts: 1137

Ooh, this exciting opinion just in!

Ayn Rand Insatitute Press Advisory
2121 Alton Parkway, Suite 250 Irvine, CA 92606

Aug. 24, 2005

Why We're Losing the War--Four Years Later

What: A talk explaining why the war on terrorism is being lost

When: Wednesday, Sept. 7, 7 p.m., Eastern Time

Where: New York University’s Kimmel Center, Room 900-series, 60 Washington Square South

Who: Dr. Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute

The latest attacks on London prove, once again, that America and its allies have failed to stop the scourge of Islamic terrorism. Four years after Sept. 11, our troops still die in both Iraq and Afghanistan, while our enemy’s bombs continue to explode in cities around the world. Why is this happening?

In World War II, America and its allies needed less than four years to eradicate the threats posed by the mighty militaries of Germany and Japan. So, what is stopping us now from annihilating the forces of Islamic totalitarianism?

Dr. Brook will argue that the answer is to be found in the realm of morality. It’s the Bush Administration’s appeasing, self-destructive policy that has made this so-called War on Terror not able to be won. From the dishonest naming of the war to the cowardly choice of countries to target to the self-sacrificial way we have fought--our government’s actions indicate a moral unwillingness to pursue America’s genuine self-interest and so the enemy’s swift destruction.

After examining the White House’s failing policy, Dr. Brook will present his idea of what a war in self-defense would actually look like, and he will explain what is urgently needed today, if America is to achieve victory tomorrow.

### ### ###

ARI executive director Dr. Yaron Brook is available for interviews.
Contact: Larry Benson at larryb@aynrand.org or 800-365-6552 ext. 213.

Mr. Mechanical · Posts: 1890

Guardian FINAL wrote:

I didn't mean to create a political thread, guys.

I think it's kind of sad how people don't want to have anything to do with political discussions these days. I mean, I don't like it when one pops up because it's always fuel for a flame war or an argument, but I always learn something new each time and am a better person for it. A couple of guys blew off my little comment on the last page, about getting out of the mid east. That doesn't really convince me of your stance, treating me like an idiot and blowing me off, even if that's how you perceive me. Edumacate me, fellas, it's what makes these kinds of discussions fun. I promise not to flame if you don't.

Despite how painful both can be, I think discussing politics and religion are important because they offer new perspectives that we wouldn't otherwise see. People never like to talk about anything important because they have too much of an emotional investment in it, I think. Forget emotions, let's try rational thought and reasonable discussion. It's possible, or at least it used to be.

I largely don't discuss politics much anymore because it seems like people get too emotional over it, and all too often it looks like people are just content to pick sides and duke it out like it's a competition or something. In my mind, that just can't be right but it's all I see. Perhaps internet forums just aren't the place for political/religious discussions? If not here, then where?

Also, one last thing that doesn't have much to do with the talking at hand but it's been on my mind: I think we should ditch the electoral college and go back to One-Man/One-Vote. I say this knowing full well that the average joe doesn't know jack shit about politics, and I think if every mans vote actually counted like it should politicians and those running for public office would be a bit more honest about things. Then, we might also end up voting in the biggest deceptor in the history of the nation so what do I know?

In conclusion, who's in favor of a more decentralized government?

Guardian FINAL · Posts: 1137

As Dave Chapelle pointed out, quite keenly, on one of his shows, it is highly ironic that people in America, the epitome of Democracy, are socially petrified of discussing politics, lest they might offend someone. It's the same reservation as people once had about religion. If we could change that, imagine how much stimulating discussion and increasing awareness might come about.

Legal Step · Posts: 1030

isn't dave chapelle dead and or missing?

He's the ricky williams of comedy, I can't wait for his triumphant return so I can pretend to have liked his show.

Bill Gates 4 lyfe!

Guardian FINAL · Posts: 1137

Legal Step wrote:

isn't dave chapelle dead and or missing?

what

dhex · Posts: 2963

yeah, i don't know what america mr. chapelle is living in, but there's no shortage of fucking strangers who are ready to fill me in on their religious, moral and political beliefs. and my co-workers, rather prim and proper ladies who have no problem calling george bush a fucking idiot in the middle of a meeting.

or that old guy yesterday who told me about his missing checkbook and how dick cheney is an asshole. what the fuck was that about?

"raising awareness" is one of those cutesy things that i think infects people somewhere along the line and never lets go, as if merely being aware of something leads to something other than awareness. especially in conjunction with african massacres; the awareness of remote peoples does very little when what is required are weapons and people willing to use them to kill those who would otherwise kill others. all the other hippy drippy stuff is pointless nonsense, unless one believes in shame as a legitimate tool of foreign policy.

edit: dammit, mech! i think it's cute that mr. chapelle believes himself to be anywhere near large enough a blemish on the face of dar al islam, pr wise, to matter.

Mr. Mechanical · Posts: 1890

No, Dave Chapelle simply took an unexpected break to Africa, I think, and then came back and announced he was cancelling his show. He's alive, but I think he went through some religious stuff. I heard he's Islamic, but he doesn't tell anyone because he doesn't want people associating a beautiful religion like that with an imperfect man such as himself.

edit-Dammit, dhex.

Mr. Mechanical · Posts: 1890

dhex wrote:

"raising awareness" is one of those cutesy things that i think infects people somewhere along the line and never lets go, as if merely being aware of something leads to something other than awareness. especially in conjunction with african massacres; the awareness of remote peoples does very little when what is required are weapons and people willing to use them to kill those who would otherwise kill others. all the other hippy drippy stuff is pointless nonsense, unless one believes in shame as a legitimate tool of foreign policy.

Okay, I can see how pointless the whole "awareness" thing is with people from another country, but is it equally so for our own? Are American politics that divorced from the public that it doesn't matter if you're "aware" or not anymore? I'd think that since this is all stuff that pertains to our own country and could potentially affect our own lives that if people were more aware of things they'd be more inclined to act on them.

dhex wrote:

i think it's cute that mr. chapelle believes himself to be anywhere near large enough a blemish on the face of dar al islam, pr wise, to matter.

Well, for people in America that only know about Islam through the 9 o'clock news, sure.

dhex · Posts: 2963

the problem here is "awareness" is a code word for "agreement" 99% of the time.

if people were only aware of the [justice/depravity] of the [war/invasion] they would be [proud/revolted] at the [sacrifice/crimes] our soldiers have to [make/commit] in order to [liberate/enslave] iraq.

again, it comes back to assuming your ideological foes, real or imagined, are either malicious or insane. even the most insane jihadi - assuming it is not too presumptuous to consider suicide bombings insane, both tactically and pr-wise - has some perfectly rational reasons for doing what he or she does. too many hawks cannot consider this any more than someone who is against the war in iraq can think of a rational reason for someone to enlist.

Mr. Mechanical · Posts: 1890

dhex wrote:

the problem here is "awareness" is a code word for "agreement" 99% of the time.

Quite the pickle, isn't it?

dhex wrote:

for fun, do a search for "nepalese workers" and "iraq" and try to figure out a historical justification as to why the insurgency would be so decisive towards buddhists from that region of the world.

I can't, not from the simple search I just did that spoke of twelve Nepalese workers being killed because they came to help the "occupying forces" in Iraq. To me that just says get the hell out now and stuff like this might stop. I know it's more deep seated than that and it's because of religious fanatacism, but how do stop that other than by completely leaving it in it's own corner of the world?

I mean, yeah, just leaving them be won't solve anything but neither will fighting them. You have to change their beliefs around to stop it fully, and I just don't know how that can happen if we're over there killing them.

killy · Posts: 162

FortNinety wrote:

See, that's the thing. There's plenty of evidence pointing towards his ineptness out there already. Hell, he makes more and more practically everyday. And its all out there, for public consumption. Problem is that most folks genuinely do not care.

I hate to sound all old and bitter, but I got off the political soapbox when I realized that I was hopelessly outnumbered, and especially when it became clear that those who are most directly impacted by his bullshit dogma are ultimately too lazy for some reason to actually do anything. Why the hell every single woman, gay, young person, and black person didn't vote to get his ass out of office this past November is beyond me.

Because it's not a system where he stays in office by default if people don't specifically vote him out, jackass. People didn't vote because it's impossible to care; on top of indivitual votes being nearly worthless and the other shenanigans going on with the voting system, the election itself was a fucking joke with neither major candidate being someone we wanted in office. It was a contest between someone who's utterly incompetent and someone who, with his campaign, willingly squandered the opportunity for a landslide victory.

It's fucking ridiculous. People like you claiming to feel hopelessly outnumbered while pointing the finger at everyone else for being lazy. As if nobody but you feels like it's hopeless.

Guardian FINAL · Posts: 1137

:thumbs up: on that one.

Psiga · Posts: 3990

dhex wrote:

more fucked up shit than you can fit onto a fucked up shit truck

Ain't it the truth.

Regarding the top-post of this page: Starting a war against a feeling was really a cute excuse for us to start a war against various third world nations without feeling like we're actually starting a war with them personally. We're not invading their borders to overthrow their leaders, we're invading their borders so we can shoot all of the terror away. See? Proper justification, right there.

Democratizing those heathens will magically make all of the small, militant, suicidal, cult-like factions disappear forever, just you wait and see!

-Psiga

veen · Posts: 131

Guardian FINAL · Posts: 1137

http://www.democrats.gov/askroberts

I asked him, among other things, whether or not videogames deserve to be protected by the Freedom of Speech.

Crazy Bacon Lips · Posts: 783

Mr. Mechanical wrote:

No, Dave Chapelle simply took an unexpected break to Africa, I think, and then came back and announced he was cancelling his show. He's alive, but I think he went through some religious stuff. I heard he's Islamic, but he doesn't tell anyone because he doesn't want people associating a beautiful religion like that with an imperfect man such as himself.

edit-Dammit, dhex.

Yeah, he converted to Islam in like '99, and he's been in South Africa for a while. Charlie Murphy said that season three is effectively nonexistent.

I asked Roberts where a beautiful woman like him learned about rocket power.

[quote="Mr. Mechanical"]

dhex wrote:

the problem here is "awareness" is a code word for "agreement" 99% of the time.

Quite the pickle, isn't it?

dhex wrote:

We should leave Iraq, etc.

A kind thought, and one probably born out of concern for the lives of our soldiers, but a misguided one. My cousin, the only male sibling in my family that I'm not ashamed to know, is going to Iraq sometime in October. Do I want him there? God no. I want him and all of his friends and everyone who's part of that mess to get the fuck out and never come back. But we can't. We've fucked up Iraq possibly even more than it was fucked up before. It would be horribly irresponsible of us to destroy a country, try to restructure it into something that resembles a free society, sorta, and only see it halfway through. Its like the Cat in the Hat. You fuck up the house, you clean that shit up, regardless of whether or not your original intentions were ethically sound. Look what happened when we left Vietnam. It's a country whose only exports are donkey shit and misery.

And piles of little arms . . .

Psiga · Posts: 3990

veen wrote:

what the fuck is the point, if it isn't possible to identify systemic problems that cause injustice and suffering, and try to make the future free of them?

Money, status, family, duty. Short-term, of course. Also, delusional sociopaths abound, who don't care.

The system is fundamentally broken. Whatever system you'd like to suggest, it's broken. There will always be people lining up to participate in the system whose value systems are aligned to the previous paragraph.

Also, a great deal of government problems are due to the manipulation of the private banks that lend money to everyone. Most people in America are in debt, and clearly the government is in massive debt. Loans with interest, based on imaginary money. Monthly payments to keep the public focused on the short-term, ever-expanding deficit to make the government take rash actions. It's a great way to keep people occupied and primed for manipulation.

So, yeah, breaking down the government doesn't save us from the private corporations who already lurk in the shadows. Dethroning them would prove to be difficult, too. The Federal Reserve Bank, a private corporation, has supposedly never been audited, and essentially only answers to itself. It can invoke national recession at will, literally. And if it ever is audited in the future, we'd only verify that we've printed more money than we have assets to back.

20XX, everybody! Well, there's nothing new under the sun. This happens with pretty much every society that develops banks. We're no better -- just bigger with more momentum.

-Psiga

FortNinety · Posts: 4591

killy wrote:

FortNinety wrote:

See, that's the thing. There's plenty of evidence pointing towards his ineptness out there already. Hell, he makes more and more practically everyday. And its all out there, for public consumption. Problem is that most folks genuinely do not care.

I hate to sound all old and bitter, but I got off the political soapbox when I realized that I was hopelessly outnumbered, and especially when it became clear that those who are most directly impacted by his bullshit dogma are ultimately too lazy for some reason to actually do anything. Why the hell every single woman, gay, young person, and black person didn't vote to get his ass out of office this past November is beyond me.

Because it's not a system where he stays in office by default if people don't specifically vote him out, jackass. People didn't vote because it's impossible to care; on top of indivitual votes being nearly worthless and the other shenanigans going on with the voting system, the election itself was a fucking joke with neither major candidate being someone we wanted in office. It was a contest between someone who's utterly incompetent and someone who, with his campaign, willingly squandered the opportunity for a landslide victory.

It's fucking ridiculous. People like you claiming to feel hopelessly outnumbered while pointing the finger at everyone else for being lazy. As if nobody but you feels like it's hopeless.

So let me get this straight... you're getting on my case for point fingers for being lazy, and yet you have the very same "votes are worthless" attitude which is ruining this coutrty. Dude, you are fucking hopeless.

For the record, I don't talk much about politics since I believe in letting my actions speak for themselves, mainly due to the fact that many folks never put their money where their mouth is (not including people around here, of course, at least some). During the election I voted "for the other guy" because I too felt that anyone was better than Bush, which seemed to be the resounding sentiment among many, and yet many did not act upon it. Why? Because many exhibited the extremely destructive "it doesn't matter dude" attitude which you seem to share.

Also for the record, I voted for Kerry but not under the Democratic party but under the working class party's banner become I'm a bigtime believer in local politics. Yes, I'm a New York resident, so perhaps I was allowed to have the "I don't give a shit" attitude that you prescribe to? No, because A) its a matter of principle and B) I know ultimately that its the local elections that directly impact my life the most, such as the mayor and other local officials. But I would have to assume (please allow me to make grand assumption about you personally since you've already done the same for me) that such things are not worth you're time since you clearly have all the answers.

And where did I state before that I felt like I was the only one who cared? Its seems perfectly clear that you're more interested in taking someone's sentiment that you not only don't agree with but don't even understand and twist thing around to throw allow yourself yet another chance to fling insults at another faceless person on the internet. Because when you get down to it, we seem to both have the same basic feelings, i.e frustration over our current leader and the system that has kept him in power, and yet you felt the need to call me out since you perhaps have nothing better to do or just have a lot of anger and what to cause shit, as evidenced with your brief history around here.

dhex · Posts: 2963

ryan · Posts: 297

People don't discuss politics as much as scream and get frustrated. For instance, the usage of the word cute is enough to make me not only twitch, but also argue with the person, regardless of whether I agree with them or not, simply because I find the sort of attitude that usage presents obnoxious. And it also doesn't help when most people don't so much as congeal their arguments into something presentable as to take and point out random stuff in a sort of 'yeah! yeah! yeah!' approach that is so scattered it isn't worth addressing - or there's the classic 'you're all blind but me!' stance that has handled up so well over time.

People are political until it comes time to doing something locally. Local governance is pretty important and is often ignored. Rocking the Vote apparently requires some glamour involved. And when did living within one's means become impossible?

shnozlak · Posts: 704

Psiga · Posts: 3990

dhex wrote:

i'd disagree with psiga on one point - it's been far worse in societies which didn't develop banks.

I didn't mean to say that things would be better without banks. Just that the bank system we've got right now is playing dirty, and that our situation is not going to get drastically better if we only make the government smaller.

If I had any suggestions as to what could practically be established or abolished, I'd make 'em.

-Psiga

FortNinety · Posts: 4591

shnozlak wrote:

oi

Just curious, is that an "Oi!" like from some UK punkers or an "Oy-vey..." like a frustrated old Jewish guy?

Guardian FINAL · Posts: 1137

As an individual with some Yiddish heritage, I can identify it with 90% statistical accuracy as the sound of a frustrated Jewish female of considerable age who regrets ever being exposed to the world of politics.

dhex · Posts: 2963

LW Joestar · Posts: 1358

Crazy Bacon Lips wrote:

About your Comedy Central comment: opinion, ill-informed judgement opinion opinion, opinion opinion OPINION AS FACT

Sorry. I just thought there might be other viewpoints than yours.

Apparently, I was wrong!

Crazy Bacon Lips · Posts: 783

Do you honestly think that modern newsmedia (newspapers excluded, for the most part) does a good job of informing the public?

Please explain to me how you feel so that we can debate things. I'd rather do that than have us make sarcastic comments back and forth for seven pages.

killy · Posts: 162

FortNinety wrote:

So let me get this straight... you're getting on my case for point fingers for being lazy, and yet you have the very same "votes are worthless" attitude which is ruining this coutrty. Dude, you are fucking hopeless.

For the record, I don't talk much about politics since I believe in letting my actions speak for themselves, mainly due to the fact that many folks never put their money where their mouth is (not including people around here, of course, at least some). During the election I voted "for the other guy" because I too felt that anyone was better than Bush, which seemed to be the resounding sentiment among many, and yet many did not act upon it. Why? Because many exhibited the extremely destructive "it doesn't matter dude" attitude which you seem to share.

Also for the record, I voted for Kerry but not under the Democratic party but under the working class party's banner become I'm a bigtime believer in local politics. Yes, I'm a New York resident, so perhaps I was allowed to have the "I don't give a shit" attitude that you prescribe to? No, because A) its a matter of principle and B) I know ultimately that its the local elections that directly impact my life the most, such as the mayor and other local officials. But I would have to assume (please allow me to make grand assumption about you personally since you've already done the same for me) that such things are not worth you're time since you clearly have all the answers.

And where did I state before that I felt like I was the only one who cared? Its seems perfectly clear that you're more interested in taking someone's sentiment that you not only don't agree with but don't even understand and twist thing around to throw allow yourself yet another chance to fling insults at another faceless person on the internet. Because when you get down to it, we seem to both have the same basic feelings, i.e frustration over our current leader and the system that has kept him in power, and yet you felt the need to call me out since you perhaps have nothing better to do or just have a lot of anger and what to cause shit, as evidenced with your brief history around here.

Blah blah blah, i've done this, wer wer wer, matter of principle and bur bur bur twisting twisting.

Looks like you actually have a fantastic grasp on the current nature of politics: shouting a bunch of pseudo-heartfelt bullshit without making any sense.

Here's a tip, ace: Voting for someone based on who sucks the least is not a good enough impetus for most people.

Psiga · Posts: 3990

This kind of bickering didn't happen in Gen3 of the forum, kids.

-Psiga

veen · Posts: 131

the point that the daily show tries to make is a very important one, particularly in light of JW's predilection for disagreement absent backing evidence for whatever point he's trying to make. what the daily show is trying to say is that yes, there is such a thing as truth. politics are not inevitably a pointless he-said she-said exercise in bullshit, though it is very much in the interest of the powerful for people to believe this.

truth exists, facts exist, and they can be judged rationally, by a scale most people can agree with. it's easy enough for us all to accept that murder is wrong, and needs to be curtailed with some sort of justice system. they why is it so impossible for people to look the fact of an unprovoked war begun by the rich and corrupt elites, and call it what it is? why do people believe that this notion is not fact, but some version of slander, that the truth is impossible for the common person to know and judge? that people in positions of power can't possibly have anything other than our best interests at heart?

how can so many just blithely observe these horrific events, and still believe that it doesn't make a difference, it's all just politics, everyone's just a trickster, the truth isn't out there, it's got nothing to do with me?

I know I'm just ranting. but fucking hell, truth exists, and it can be judged.

veen · Posts: 131

killy wrote:

Here's a tip, ace: Voting for someone based on who sucks the least is not a good enough impetus for most people.

oh god, the whining, the excuses. it should be good enough, because it does matter who holds power, even if none of the current choices are ideal. it's still worthwhile to move upward from a lower circle of hell, even though you can't get out in one shot. progress is gradual, there will never be a perfect candidate, and it's fucking idiotic to abstain because that perfect candidate isn't there.

George · Posts: 1656

Psiga wrote:

I don't know what you're talking about. The man is a hero. A modern cowboy, riding. Riding and riding.

-Psiga

I know this was a joke and all, but Bush is pretty much an anti-cowboy. Cowboys rely on no one but themselves and MAYBE, just MAYBE, one or two close friends. A cowboy would have went to Iraq and taken down Saddam himself, or died trying.

Crazy Bacon Lips · Posts: 783

I'd like Bush a lot more if he was packing a six-gun.

It'd be great if, at press conferences, he'd pantomime a lasso to "catch" questions.

Maztorre · Posts: 1175

It may as well be a noose, the way he replies.

DonMarco · Posts: 565

I AM NOT KILLY, STOP IT PSIGA FUCKING HELL Rud13's note: He's telling the truth, I have IP addresses to prove it.

Also! Hipkondo is needed. He kept the balance...

FortNinety · Posts: 4591

killy wrote:

Blah blah blah, i've done this, wer wer wer, matter of principle and bur bur bur twisting twisting.

Looks like you actually have a fantastic grasp on the current nature of politics: shouting a bunch of pseudo-heartfelt bullshit without making any sense.

At least I'm, you know, contributing to society, instead of sitting in a corner trying to "prove" to everyone how stupid they are and patting myself in the back for it.

You really come across as a person who seems to "have all the answers" and yet has had relatively littler or perhaps no genuine interactions with other human beings whatsoever, and knows this all to well. Either that or someone kicked sand in your face once and have been out for blood ever since.

And I love how you never seem to avoid the fact that someone has pointed out your inconsistencies.

What the hell am I thinking, you've probably never voted a day in your life, perhaps because you're 16 or something.

FortNinety · Posts: 4591

Crazy Bacon Lips wrote:

I'd like Bush a lot more if he was packing a six-gun.

It'd be great if, at press conferences, he'd pantomime a lasso to "catch" questions.

When he talks, its as if he's aching for a spittoon or something.

veen · Posts: 131

FortNinety wrote:

What the hell am I thinking, you've probably never voted a day in your life, perhaps because you're 16 or something.

actually we went through this before in ye olde tim rogers is a douche thread. killy isn't an adolescent, and he's not stupid. there's something interesting there, it's just hard to discern beneath all the venom. I don't think he's any more or less full of shit than the rest of us, though he's always trying to convince someone that he's less.

extralife · Posts: 3316

veen wrote:

I don't think he's any more or less full of shit than the rest of us, though he's always trying to convince someone that he's less.

Which, of course, makes him more.

Psiga · Posts: 3990

DonMarco wrote:

I AM NOT KILLY, STOP IT PSIGA FUCKING HELL

Wha'? Whaddid'I'do?

And to my knowledge, Bush did go out to the desert. For a little while. To serve mashed taters.

-Psiga

LW Joestar · Posts: 1358

Crazy Bacon Lips wrote:

Do you honestly think that modern newsmedia (newspapers excluded, for the most part) does a good job of informing the public?

Please explain to me how you feel so that we can debate things. I'd rather do that than have us make sarcastic comments back and forth for seven pages.

Ah, I was just messin' around.

To be actually serious for once, no, I don't think that most news media informs us correctly at all. They only go after what they think will pull in ratings, which is usually just insipid controversy, meaningless sensationalism, and hollow speculation.

And people feed on it and accept it as the full story, and it makes me angry. The fact that I used the Daily Show in my earlier comment was being ironic on two levels: 1) It's a comedy show where they read a headline and then make the rest up. Of course it's not REAL NEWS, it's basically what Mystery Science Theater would have been if they read newspapers instead of watched movies. And 2) my friend actually DOES listen to the Daily Show to create his "informed world view". For that matter, he probably thinks the presidential debate in 2000 really DID consist of George Bush singing "Gay Bar" to Al Gore, like in that flash video.

Basically what I'm saying is "you don't know what's really happenning because your sources don't want to tell you all of it, so please stop making judgements based off of table scraps."

Crazy Bacon Lips · Posts: 783

Certainly understandable. High-Five!

Guardian FINAL · Posts: 1137

Okay. To get right down to it, let's say that I want to be more politically active in my country. I have a strong opinion, feel that the events of the last few years and those continuing today are some of the ugliest mistakes that my country has made in some time. I think that Bush has slowly changed his tune from "we need to blow up Iraq because they probably maybe have WMDs" to "we need to blow up Iraq because it is a haven for terrorists who want to eat us." I think that, in the first case, we have a bit of an ego problem by implying that our national security is of higher import than everyone else's in that we are allowed to keep a huge stockpile of nuclear weapons but we cannot allow anyone else to get ahold of even one. In the second case, we are implying that a state can be held accountable for the actions of small numbers of the individuals who reside there -- to say nothing of the sentiment that we are justified in invading a foreign nation and removing its government by force, effectively destroying the country, as long as doing so keeps us safe. Neither of these points even suggests that there are enormous factual presumptions and unfounded intelligence underlying both motives for the war.

How can I communicate to people? Protesters don't have much effect, and certainly their individual voices are rarely, if ever, heard. I could print tons of flyers and put them in stores and on telephone polls, but I don't think my area needs much converting. I could write to my senator, but what does he have to do with the president? What can a person like me do? In other words, explain to me how I am not helpless.

veen · Posts: 131

we are helpless, both because of the flawed, unrepresentational form of government we have, and the propensity of government to enlarge itself, defend itself, tie itself inextricably into the fabric of the nation so that the two cannot be separated in people's minds, and become little more than a complicated front for promoting the agendas of the upper classes. everything is designed, or has at least gradually come to be designed, to take the power out of the hands of the people, and concentrate it in the government and those connected to the government. to the point where it is not possible for the voices of ~50 million citizens to have any impact whatsoever on the single minded, far-right course of the current administration. where the only accountability those in power have is to lie with a straight face at a news conference once a month.

hey, at least the social security thing didn't fly. it's a little surprising to me that nobody has even tried to knock off cheney or rove yet.

JW, two things. no, three things. first, thanks for writing something.

second, the daily show often has more to it than jokes. a lot of it is just meaningless humor, but whenever they take on an important political issue, they consciously use humor to negate all the spin and propaganda, in order to get people to think about the actual issue, and not the obvious lies surrounding it. surveys have shown that their audience is better educated than that of any "real" news channel.

third, while I appreciate your sentiment regarding most news media, that doesn't mean it's impossible for people to actually get at something close to the truth, if they get their information from more trustworthy sources. you can't always assume that everyone's take on a situation is the product of bad information from the mainstream media. it's a hopeless scenario if the average citizen isn't capable of getting at the truth of the issue, even with the most diligent and discerning evidence gathering, and I don't think that's the case.