Ya trolling for something?

Post #28,975 by screamer 2/19/02 5:33:26 PM Reply	Ya trolling for something? I read the post... I read your "Subject" line... I read the excerpt... I have one thing to say... Democrat DOES NOT EQUAL Liberal. This article lumps them together and makes it seem as such. If I happen to write an article that says... "Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, like all conservatives, believe that there should be prayer in school, mandatory tything, school uniforms (preferably pixie uniforms), 24/7 drive thru prayer booths, etc..." you would be all over it. I realize that you are merely trolling so I'll leave this alone, but the implication that liberalism is a form of insanity is nothing but an insult. Some of the greatest minds of the last century were "Liberal" ones... perhaps most... Just because you found someone who writes bullshit and gets it published, doesn't mean it has any validity... N'est ce pas? Why are you continually trolling this tired subject? Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #29,010 by Silverlock 2/19/02 11:29:45 PM Reply	I find myself in a strange position... Complete agreement with Screamer. Hell, what was it we were fighting about earlier? I forget. With this much manure around, there must be a pony somewhere.
Post #29,015 by bepatient 2/19/02 11:51:06 PM Reply	Even stranger... ...I happen to agree with both of you. Ack ;-) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #29,023 by Ashton 2/20/02 1:19:12 AM Reply	Et moi.. Migawd~!____it's full of stars! Somehow this thread reminds me of the immortal Frank Zappa's paean to adolescent angst, Crusing for Burgers in Daddy's New Car
Post #29,046 by jb4 2/20/02 9:34:28 AM Reply	And lions will lie down with lambs... and Ashton, screamer, BePatient, Silverlock and jb4 will all hold hands and sing "kumbayah" around the campfire... Or maybe not... Well, OK, maybe this once... jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #29,049 by screamer 2/20/02 10:50:38 AM Reply	And I find myself in an even stranger one... because it appears that on this forum, I am been cornered into some type of knee jerk conservative... I actually was thinking about writing a treatise on liberalism for this forum anticipating Marlowe's response. I was going to cover ground like how crazy it is that the Republican party has coopted Christian issues as part of their platform, when in fact, Jesus Christ was perhaps the first non-violent revolutionary... probably not a Republican (:-) ) I was then going to go to Lincoln (the first Republican) and ask how he would feel about civil rights (a Democratic coopted platform)... I mean, these are some major contradictions to the binary thinking that is displayed here sometimes, no? Quite honestly, I don't know how to react to some of the crap that is posted here and to the American public through the mainstream media. I am a true liberal in the dictionary sense. I will [link\|http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6443/liberal.htm\|I will defer to this writer...] for a reference point. I am so liberal that I would vote Republican. Think about it. I have felt compelled to challenge you guys when you jump all over BePatient with popular slogans. I don't think he needs my "help", as he is one of the more consistently intelligent writers here and on IWETHEY, now going on 4 years for me (aka danreck, dreck). I also happen to agree with Bill on certain philosophical issues, such as the flat tax* and that Clinton should have been removed from office, etc... Bill could be more aptly labeled a "fiscal conservative" (fair, Bill?). In past fora, he has agreed with me that big G has a big role to play in the corporate world to make sure that monopolies don't thrive, that polluters get booted, etc... Don't confuse BePatient as an Invisible Hander. Marlowe, I also think that Jackson and NOW have become anachronisms and no longer represent the philosophies that they "stand for". To me, this does not marginalize the concepts of civil rights for women and minorities. These folks are Democrats (bought and paid for) and not necessarily "liberals". * NOTE: The Republican Party did not endorse a flat tax... Forbes didn't make it out of the primaries. I also have been very keen to point out when Democrats are being assholes. Why? For most of my life, I have considered myself a "liberal" and Democrat, ala Adlai Stevenson [link\|http://www.uua.org/uuhs/duub/articles/adlaistevenson.html\|(a brief article explaining who he was for the young)] and am quite disgusted by the way the Democratic party of the US has disintegrated over the past 40 years. I am very bitter. The Republican party has become the party of "progress" and "liberal" ideas. The Democrats have become conservative. I will defer to Stevenson (the article linked above) to make my main point... " Stevenson told the Unitarian Church of Bloomington, Illinois: "If a liberal wishes to win friends and influence people (and what liberal doesn't?), then one thing he cannot afford is the luxury of dogmatism." "Our reasonableness," he went on to say, "must always be motivated by the urge to learn, to share and to find common ground." His faith informed both his public utterances and his efforts on behalf of a more peaceful world." Silverlock, does it now seem so strange to be in complete agreement? Just a few thoughts, Dan Reck "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #29,057 by Brandioch 2/20/02 11:31:02 AM Reply	Do it! Hmmmm, maybe we need a forum dedicated to personal manifestos? :)
Post #29,064 by mmoffitt 2/20/02 11:52:54 AM Reply	I'll start. Here's my link... [link\|http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1848/communist-manifesto/\|mmoffitt manifesto]
Post #29,206 by bepatient 2/21/02 10:41:36 AM Reply	I didn't know... ...your name was Karl! Pleasures all mine! You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #29,658 by mmoffitt 2/25/02 2:59:05 PM Reply	Sorry for the deception - kindred spirit only I'm afraid ;-)
Post #29,111 by screamer 2/20/02 3:46:12 PM 2/20/02 4:02:44 PM Reply	Can I have some fries with that manifesto? Yep... Maybe we should have a little hyperlinked "manifesto" icon next to our "registered user". Of course, the Ashtofesto would be too long to actually read, the CRCfesto would be too vulgar, the Tillesto would be too academic, etc... Of course, you know what would come next... ...Damnit Brandioch, if you'd just bother to ACTUALLY READ my manifesto, you wouldn't be posting crap like this... ad infinitum... And sometimes, I just feel like Rodney King. I have a two year old and on Sunday, he came down while I was watching morning TV, probably "De-Face the Nation" or whatnot. "Daddy, why are peoples so loud?", he asked. "Daddy, make them stop fighting!", he said. "Daddy, why are you watching?", he asked. He then grabbed the remote and turned off the tv. "Daddy feel better now?", he asked. Yep, I did feel better... Just a few thoughts, Dan (Putting Descartes infront of Des horse) Reck in South Bend "Why can't we all just get along?" R. King Edited by screamer Feb. 20, 2002, 04:02:44 PM EST Expand All History
Post #29,153 by Ashton 2/21/02 12:27:27 AM Reply	As to that Danofesto.. Best make sure it recognizes its milieu, OK? We live in the World of Opposites - and when that is mirrored by binary thinking .. all we get is Librul/Cunservative papier-mache -men and all that sound & fury signifying nothing. No point in bemoaning the vapid mindsets of millions - what we need is the aberration, the almost-Impossible event: clear homo-sap thought! related to the present form of a continuing serial tragicomedy. All you need be is.. Brilliant. Hope yer up to it! :-\ufffd Ashton Nothing new under the sun - just re-runs.
Post #29,069 by boxley 2/20/02 12:07:49 PM Reply	still working on mine but like this one "The `hippy' babbles on about individuality, but has no more conception of it than any other man. He desires to get back to Nature, back to the wilderness, back to the home of furry animals that he's one of, away from the city, where there is at least a trace, a bare beginning of civilization, to live at the species level, his time taken up with simple, non-intellectual activities -- farming, fucking, bead stringing. The most important activity of the commune, the one upon which it is based, is gang-banging. The `hippy' is enticed to the commune mainly by the prospect for free pussy -- the main commodity to be shared, to be had just for the asking, but, blinded by greed, he fails to anticipate all the other men he has to share with, or the jealousies and possessiveness for the pussies themselves." [link\|http://www.ai.mit.edu/~shivers/rants/scum.html\|scum manifesto] ROFL! so true! thanx, bill "I'm selling a hammer," he says. "They can beat nails with it, or their dog." Richard Eaton spy software innovator
Post #29,146 by Ashton 2/20/02 11:16:37 PM Reply	Great catalog of familiar vanities, but out of all that great material you pick out a minor screed on the special vanities of the 'hippies' (whatever the Fuck that might mean, given how randomly it's applied as epithet). Hmmm did she hit a nerve there - Mr. wannabe harem curator? Imaginin yer Gawd's Gift to Vaginas or somethin? Ashton Tough shit, baby - you missed Berkeley, but I didn't ;-) (I didn't even miss the City Lights Bookstore scene and The Black Cat Cafe, too.) Nyaa nyaa nyaaaaa :-\ufffd
Post #29,199 by screamer 2/21/02 10:24:28 AM Reply	Did you ever make to the Stone or the Fillmores? I know it's across the pond, but it was well worth it in the seventies... Even the early eighties (if you liked the leather and studs and spiked mohawks...) Another movement that has turned into an anachronism (seen the play, Hip Hippy Hooray lately?) - as it probably should have for the most part. Too much emphasis on "now", on self gratification, on intuition. Definately not a good thing. The major contradiction - who was gov of hippyland for the better part of the seventies??? Moohoohahahahahaha.... Dichotomies R us... That's why I'm so found of my term - hippycrits... We've come full circle, haven't we? On a lighter note, I miss the weekend boardwalk jaunts to Santa Cruz. And feeding the seals and sea lions. Never could get those damned otters into the game! They must have been conservative. Just a few thoughts, Screamer "Whatever happened to all that feel good hippy shit" Psychoderelict - P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #29,238 by Ashton 2/21/02 12:22:14 PM Reply	Just.. Mothers (of Invention) at the Fillmore, mostly. Rock never my forte. Amplified geetars n' stuff - generally make my head hurt. Mothers much too loud too, but at least they were real musicians and had something to say - and Zappa was a virtuoso kinda guy. (Ian Underwood I knew pre-Mothers: when he was playing Mozart at Hertz Hall! ;-) Anyway.. the whole period has become a rich broth for each newbie to manufacture YAN This IS the Way It Was.. Honest! I have no delusion that "the THIS that I saw" was any more than an infinitesimal slice of a holographic organism. Among the so-called (and now eviscerated, deconstructed, Disneylandized) "hippies" were some genuine mensch of both genders, along with the usual opportunists, so about That Time: Those who Know don't Say. Those who Say don't Know. All I'll venture is: there were a fucking Lot more Alive people around Then - than the pissant, led-to-slaughter Corp. consumer-sheep du jour. I believe that something Important for the maturing of Murica beyond its perennial adolescence: Died-Dead, largely related-to the three assassinations between '63 and '68 -- and the growing catastrophe of Vietnam (whose effects we have yet to face with any guts). Ashton Wondering if we'll survive the double-whammy of a Dubya AND an Ashcroft.. that sanctimonious twit + some new Troglodyte on the USSC [??] could generate buckets o' Fundamentalist blood on the steps.. y'know?
Post #29,202 by boxley 2/21/02 10:32:37 AM Reply	too busy dodging Manson's bevy of beauties :) Naw, I just found that paticular part highly amusing as it exactly nailed the communes dead center. I am not his gift to the vagina, I am rather a worshipper of the device. I personally considered myself a yippie ala hoffman rather than a hippy. The era of love peace and acid was brought down by speed and heroin. The hippies called me a biker and the bikers mostly left me to my own devices. Used to have a tshirt .0001er, just confused em. Time I got to the height mother speed and mayhem had taken over. thanx, "I'm selling a hammer," he says. "They can beat nails with it, or their dog." Richard Eaton spy software innovator
Post #29,226 by Ashton 2/21/02 11:56:59 AM Reply	Inevitably the saner parts were eclipsed by the usual.. Actually I find more incisive thought in the screed you linked to; the lady who fired one at one o' our PopIcons - than any Univ. 'grade' psych / sociology course. This woman had good taste: picked an appropriate target for her pea shooter and, while there is bitterness from experience, in her phraseology: She has the guts to notice the layers and layers of 'traditional Farmily Valuez' which are, even more cynical a construct than her's! (need I add IMnsHO?) The entire male/female relationship in most places simply mirrors the BS about "the compassionate rich" VS the "poor because they are lazy" and the other Murican fantasies we were fed with the pabulum about this bein a 'democracy'. No wonder the occasional female loses it.. and starts gunning for anything wearing gonads and spouting drivel. Thanks for that link - made my whole day! As a life-long 'biker' of a sort, I'm not unfamiliar with stereotypes about most any 'just slightly Different' assemblage in Puritan Murica. It's how I learned how the mob Really operates = every bully is a scared shitless little boy, just like the lady said. Your take on the arrival of crank/speed etc. seems about right - and as inevitable as.. Billy givin away a few pittances to try to create a different rep from "autistic brat sociopath". Hypocritical little prick.. I can't fault the Angels, say, for collectin toys fer tots n'such periodic PR, too: in Murica all there IS is 'image' - and you can remanufacture that anytime. 'Least we gots Hunter Thompson / Fear and Loathing in [Everywhere] / Tom Lehrer, Geo Carlin! .. for occasional breaths of fresh air amidst the daily drivel. Maybe we fucking Deserve the sanctimonious cadaver-face of the Holy Twit Ashcroft - to rub our noses in how fucking Ridiculous we have become, as a 'nation' and especially as: "an example of how to live on this planet\ufffd". Poetic Justice! Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. What a horrific denouement! to.. the magnificent Vision of the Founding Mothers: that 'we' have become such a banal, Puritan-fearful, theological-besotted bunch of Corporate drones, let into our cubicles each dawn, to slave away for the 3% Super-Rats as are always behind the scenes, wallowing in terminal greed. (Thanks Holly Golightly, for That epithet!). RIP Audrey Hepburn - you too were a breath of fresh air VS the usual self-obsessed 'star' (I met her, before Roman Holiday came out and she became a Super Object of Attention: Class.) Well.. enough pleasantries for this fine foggy Thursday. So aside from That Mrs. Lincoln, how did you enjoy the play? Ashton Maybe we deserve Ari Fleisher too: remember.. WATCH WHAT YOU SAY! <<< OK: Fuck You Too, Ari! Bite me.
Post #29,235 by boxley 2/21/02 12:16:51 PM Reply	That was an absolutely great rant and it was hard keeping the bursts of chagrined chuckles from escaping the cube as she had a laser pointed at who and what we are. thanx, bill "I'm selling a hammer," he says. "They can beat nails with it, or their dog." Richard Eaton spy software innovator
Post #29,243 by drewk 2/21/02 12:38:09 PM Reply	Finally got around to reading it Wow, was she pissed. No wonder she shot Warhol, if this is how he made her feel. No wait, can't lay this all on him. She was ... umm, "disturbed" I guess. We have to fight the terrorists as if there were no rules and preserve our open society as if there were no terrorists. -- [link\|http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/05/opinion/BIO-FRIEDMAN.html\|Thomas Friedman]
Post #29,073 by Brandioch 2/20/02 12:20:59 PM Reply	I like those definitions. But I have a question. While the founding fathers were "liberal" at the time..... Would it be possible for a modern "conservative" to wish to retain those original "liberal" beliefs? In other words, is it possible that "liberal" thought 200 years ago is "conservative" thought now?
Post #29,075 by boxley 2/20/02 12:51:58 PM Reply	liberal thought in 1962 is being spouted by shrub today, thanx, bill "I'm selling a hammer," he says. "They can beat nails with it, or their dog." Richard Eaton spy software innovator
Post #29,085 by jb4 2/20/02 1:48:52 PM Reply	Funny... I don't remember anybody in the administration in 1962 who would have EVER thought of nominating someone like Ashhole to the office of Attorney General... Or would have considered scuttling a treaty as important as the Kyoto Accords... And I was there... jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #29,089 by boxley 2/20/02 1:59:32 PM Reply	bobbyK!=ashole? him and his brother boinking the people who put them in office. Sammy g etc. thanx, bill "I'm selling a hammer," he says. "They can beat nails with it, or their dog." Richard Eaton spy software innovator
Post #29,097 by screamer 2/20/02 2:41:50 PM Reply	You say chicken, I say egg? That is the exactly the kind of contradiction I was trying to bring up... Modern conservatives are absolutely trying to preserve past "radical" ideas or else we we be on Hammurabi 2002. But the more I think about it, it's not really a contradiction... There has to be an origin for the ideas. IMHO, unless we believe that we are at the absolute zenith of what society can be, there must be liberals who are willing to try out new political ideas so that conservatives can weed out what works and what doesn't (sort of like a philosophical societal Accounting dept?). Neither philosophy can be stagnant either. There must be brilliant conservatives as well, people who know what is worth preserving (an art in itself). I'll post the Danifesto as soon as done in rough draft... Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #29,115 by Brandioch 2/20/02 4:12:39 PM Reply	Toe-may-toe or Tah-mah-toe? But the problem with historical labeling, such as that, is that "liberal" ideas become "conservative" values. I'd prefer a labeling system based upon something other than historical criteria. Such as "liberal" equating to more personal freedom (the extreme being "anarchy" with no governmental controls over the individual's behaviour). Of course, "conservative" would have to stand for something other than more individual restrictions. Not to mention corporations and such and their "rights"/responsibilities. For example, the existing liberal/conservative dichotomy is flawed regarding personal rights. Take gun control. Traditionally a "liberal" cause. It seeks to limit the rights of individuals that they currently enjoy. While "conservatives" seek to ensure that right. I think a spectrum would be best. Individual's rights............ Individual's responsibilities.......... Societ's rights........... Societ's responsibilities......... and so on.
Post #29,124 by screamer 2/20/02 6:01:28 PM Reply	You say "arms" and I say "nukes"... Not to get too crazy with this, but the actual "right" is to keep and bear "arms". Not such a "liberal" notion given the times it was written... If you didn't hunt, you may starve. The strict interpretation of this "right" would mean that I could bear "any damned arm" I please, including a tank, a flame thrower, cruise missile, nukes, etc... While this would probably come in handy on the freeway sometimes, I don't necessarily think that this was what the framers of the thing foresaw... I could be wrong. Moreover, I don't give a solid rat's ass what the "framers" foresaw if you try and tell me that it's good for a civilized society to walk around with holsters and ouzi's... And in the same liberal spirit, given the First Amendment, I should be free to pray anywhere I please, including a public school. And I should be free to pray to whatever I want to in public. I should be free to say fuck on TV and to yell "fire" in a crowded theater. Seriously. There is no qualification. It says "Congress shall make NO law"... This is guaranteed to me in the First... So therein lies the rub with me. We, as a society, either need to encase this precious document in glass and start praying to it, or to continue to edit/repeal/repent or do whatever is in "we the people's" power to make it apply to the needs of the current century/era. I personally would prefer that we choose to keep trying to improve. And what we need to stop doing is using it like a fundamentalist preacher trying to prove "his" point by selecting on the parts that suit his needs - and omitting the rest. We need to decide in a binary fashion (;-) - IS IT STATIC AND SACRED, OR IS IT A STARTING POINT... I think a lot of arguments could be stopped before they got started if we'd just determine this. Again, I could be mistaken. I went through all of that to tell you that I really like your idea of creating a new system of labels based on where a person leans on a Societal/Individual rights and responsibilities scale. It's a good starting point. Consider this the preface to the Danifesto... Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #29,126 by Brandioch 2/20/02 6:45:12 PM Reply	Nuke 'em 'till they glow. That's why I said the extreme end of personal rights is anarchy. Not such a "liberal" notion given the times it was written... If you didn't hunt, you may starve. I always thought it was so the government couldn't oppress the citizens via firepower. But that doesn't matter. We have the right to keep and bear arms, today. Adding the right to have nukes would be an increase in personal rights. Moreover, I don't give a solid rat's ass what the "framers" foresaw if you try and tell me that it's good for a civilized society to walk around with holsters and ouzi's... When they were first introduced, tommy guns were available to ANYONE. You could even get them via mailorder. We now have fewer rights than we did then (regarding gun ownership). What did we get when we lost those rights? And in the same liberal spirit, given the First Amendment, I should be free to pray anywhere I please, including a public school. And you can. Try it. And I should be free to pray to whatever I want to in public. And you can. Try it. I should be free to say fuck on TV and to yell "fire" in a crowded theater. "Fuck" on HBO (etc) and "fire" if there is, in fact, a fire that people need to be warned of. They only get annoyed when you cause a panic. Read my post again. Notice the part about Society's rights? Yelling "fire" when there isn't one can cause a panic which infringes upon society's rights. We, as a society, either need to encase this precious document in glass and start praying to it, or to continue to edit/repeal/repent or do whatever is in "we the people's" power to make it apply to the needs of the current century/era. And it doesn't apply how? I don't see anything that needs to be changed in the Constitution/Bill of Rights/etc. New laws can handle new technologies easier than risking the basis of our government. We need to decide in a binary fashion (;-) - IS IT STATIC AND SACRED, OR IS IT A STARTING POINT... I think a lot of arguments could be stopped before they got started if we'd just determine this. I think most people see it as a starting point. But when it is a starting point, do you move forward or backward? Do you add rights or do you remove rights? Thanks for your support. I think it would be easier to discuss some of these issues if we can look at them one a rights/responsibilities and individual/society/whatever continuum. In fact, it then becomes a question of what specific responsibilities you are willing to accept for specific rights (both individual and societal). For a specific instance, gun control. We can move beyond "gun control is Fascist!" or "gun control saves children!" Instead, we can look at what responsibilities gun ownership entails for the individual and what society's rights/responsibilities are regarding gun owning individuals.
Post #29,144 by screamer 2/20/02 10:28:18 PM Reply	It is all a matter of degrees isn't it. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to bitch. I guess that it is necessary to move somewhere east or west of anarchy, but I think my biggest problem is with just "who decides" and are they being influenced by altruistic societal interests or by the prevailing political wind. Just from your posts here, over the years, I know that you too are keenly interested in America's War on Itself... The usurping of individual rights to the collective has been a steady process through most of my adult life and you are correct, I don't expect that I will be given any additional priviledges, as much as I want to "clear the road" with two trucks doing .0111834 MPH difference with my personal hood mounted LAW... I know it's no big secret to you, but I have very little confidence in our system of checks and balances or in the altruism of the Congress, the White House or the Supreme Court. I'm not paranoid enough to think there is a vast conspiracy and based on my experience with the government, I doubt that they could ever coordinate such a major conspiracy. :-) I am disappointed though. I am now getting old enough (2 score) to realize that very little actually changes and that true political change seems to move at a glacial pace. In a sick way, though, I still have hope. Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #29,151 by Ashton 2/20/02 11:57:42 PM Reply	Unless you think Shakespeare missed something important (?) ought you to be surprised at the repetitive nature of human folly.. or more recently, B. Russell's little cartoon + quip, Since the beginning man has never refrained from any folly of which he is capable. Upthread a bit - we have The Ox's link to a nicely iconoclastic description of how we've Bowdlerized even our concept of male/female and built a culture to prevent anyone from realizing just how screwed up we are - on the most basic of levels. (Hey! at least the lady had the balls to take a shot at Mr. M. Chauvinist Pig hisself! Oughtta be worth as many kudos as the Rambo icon, no?). Checks & Balances. Pondered that one. Given the (obviously declining) attention span du jour, the equally declining individual experience of ever reading.. a variety of 'histories'? and other retrograde indications: Why would you imagine that 'checks & balances' are anything other than .. Me! and Thee! regurgitating the Obvious, to the Unwilling and often comatose... however ineptly, given we aren't Will S. or Bertie R. ?? WE = new people all the time! ARE ALL we ever get of Checks & Balances. Fall asleep for too large a % of a generation, and what you get are: A Scalia, a Rhenquist; a Dan Quayle, a Dubya ... and recently: GOVERNMENT er "Faith-Based" subsidies and a Calvinist Ashcroft - offended at a STATUE !! (maybe if he has 2 kids, he's fucked twice - and still regrets the shameful experience with such a Godless harlot who would permit it. Oh the Evil Temptress!) There will be no Final Solution to the forgetfulness of our species; ditto IMHO - no one has yet collected better ingredients for living despite our idiocies: than the US Constitution, product of prodigious minds AND hearts. We are all Sisyphus here. Best get ready pushing that stone Up the hill from whence it rolled.. in response to the debilitating effects of the Least Common Denominator of homo-saps: the Bone-lazy Opportunist, driven by puerile greed. Toil + cheers, Ashton
Post #29,189 by screamer 2/21/02 9:57:10 AM Reply	So, is ya a Libreel or ain't ya? Sound and fury. Walking shadows... You even threw in Ecclesiastes for me up above in yonder threads... I spose your favorite movies are "The World According to Garp" and "Harold and Maude"? Two of mine... I posted to this thread merely to get the opportunity to bring up the name Adlai Stevenson, someone who died when I was 4, but I've admired for as long as I can remember. The Danofesto is will need a few more years while I try and sort out what I "really" think. In the meantime, I just try and plagarize some of your festos? K? Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #29,221 by Brandioch 2/21/02 11:41:43 AM Reply	"Altruism"? You make me laugh! I know it's no big secret to you, but I have very little confidence in our system of checks and balances or in the altruism of the Congress, the White House or the Supreme Court. The same lack of confidence was enshrined in our Constitution. The government will, because of human nature, seek to control every aspect of people's lives and remove every personal freedom. Now, the only way I can see to stop this is to cut through the rhetoric and jingo and blah words that pass for "political discussion". If we can take each right / responsibility apart to its basic components, we can have an actual DISCUSSION. We can also illustrate how the rights and responsibilities of the individual and the society are linked. I'm not paranoid enough to think there is a vast conspiracy and based on my experience with the government, I doubt that they could ever coordinate such a major conspiracy. No real conspiracy. Just human nature. People with a psychological need to control others finding their way into governmental positions. And the cycle continues. The rights we lose through bureaucracy will only be regained through revolution. Or, there MIGHT be another way. >IF< enough people are educated on the process and willing to put the effort in, the laws removing the rights can be repealed. The rights can be codified. The only problem I see is that the process will take actual effort. Effort spent >THINKING< instead of restating current slogans. Effort spent writing the laws and pushing them through the legal system. The sheep will believe whatever tripe is fed to them by the government (populated by people seeking to take their rights). Well, they'll believe it as long as they can be kept warm, fat and happy (ignorance is bliss). And, yes, most people are sheep who can't even name their congress-critters. I won't even go into world history or even US history or international politics. Jingoism appeals to emotions. Discussion appeals to intellect. We can change the situation. If we want to and if we have the dedication to do so. Or we can sit back and let whatever will happen, happen.
Post #29,687 by Ashton 2/25/02 9:32:59 PM Reply	The Founding Mothers were so prescient that, they anticipated your last conclusion! and enshrined it for all time, in the pithy sentence Eternal vigilance is the price of freedom. Whenever we forget the regular, unfailing 'action' implicit in that principle - we'll trade citizenship for the label consumer; replace vigilance... with indifference, shopping and - Tee Vee infotainment. The Watchtower (religious) Society got One thing right, *Awake!*
Post #29,159 by Durandal 2/21/02 2:11:24 AM Reply	Re: I like those definitions. > In other words, is it possible that "liberal" thought 200 years ago is "conservative" thought now? I'd say so if such thought has become traditional.
Post #29,099 by wharris2 2/20/02 2:58:49 PM Reply	2-dimensional axis Jerry Pournelle once had a 2-dimensional political axis on his roundtable on GEnie circa ten years ago; I'll have to see if I can dig it up. It's a much better description of various political philosophies than the kneejerk "demoncrat=liberal" "republican=conservative" (neither of which is necessarily true.) Where each demon is slain, more hate is raised, yet hate unchecked also multiplies. - L. E. Modesitt, from his Recluse series
Post #29,103 by drewk 2/20/02 3:20:32 PM Reply	Try this one The [link\|http://www.lp.org/quiz/\|World's Smallest Political Quiz]. We have to fight the terrorists as if there were no rules and preserve our open society as if there were no terrorists. -- [link\|http://www.nytimes.com/2001/04/05/opinion/BIO-FRIEDMAN.html\|Thomas Friedman]
Post #29,110 by boxley 2/20/02 3:45:58 PM Reply	at least one sneaky question in there taxes or user fees do they mean sliding scale user fees or sliding scale taxes? thanx, bill "I'm selling a hammer," he says. "They can beat nails with it, or their dog." Richard Eaton spy software innovator
Post #29,114 by Brandioch 2/20/02 3:57:56 PM Reply	Kick ass! Libertarian 37.3% Left-liberal 17.5% Centrist 29.6% Right-Conservative 7.4% Authoritarian 8.1% Your Personal Self-Government Score is 80%. Your Economic Self-Government Score is 40%. Must be because I think taxes are better than user fees and that tarrifs are handy in some situations.

Welcome to IWETHEY!