World Politics

[Hugh Januss]

how about the usual suspects, does that dry your tears? you seem awfully sensitive.

Ah, The Usual Suspects great movie! I still don't get your point (?)

 

[patricknd]

Ah, The Usual Suspects great movie! I still don't get your point (?)

my point was censorship by attack. look at marinoni's response to what i said versus that made by brodeal. one was a reasonable question, the other an immediate attempt to divert the point through insult. i've been practicing it myself lately, (as you may have noticed) and i'm disappointed that it just seems to blend in with the others, no one seems to think there is anything wrong with it. insults hurled back and forth take the place of intelligent exchange of ideas. there are some here that are capable of reasoned discourse, and i enjoy reading the debates, but there are many, perhaps a majority of the frequent posters that seem to have attended the jerry springer show too many times.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

I deleted a few of those posts. Stay on track guys, please. You can discuss any political topic from whatever angle, but refrain from personal attacks and such diversions.

 

[Anonymous]

my point was censorship by attack. look at marinoni's response to what i said versus that made by brodeal. one was a reasonable question, the other an immediate attempt to divert the point through insult. i've been practicing it myself lately, (as you may have noticed) and i'm disappointed that it just seems to blend in with the others, no one seems to think there is anything wrong with it. insults hurled back and forth take the place of intelligent exchange of ideas. there are some here that are capable of reasoned discourse, and i enjoy reading the debates, but there are many, perhaps a majority of the frequent posters that seem to have attended the jerry springer show too many times.

I sorta have to agree here with Patrick...the place is just lousy with negativity...even when you are a left wing guy...talking about politics is fine...but bro and some of the other folks here, it is sorta ridiculous...and they get such hard ons when you mention them....even over politics...I used to like this forum stuff for about 9 months and it was sorta interesting via differ views....but whenever I think of it lately I just get sorta sick via my stomach....the negativity is unbelievable....like some weird 7th grade thing...and oh yeah man I wanna be part of your sick ****ing group and be one of you...just miss that numbnuts...

 

[Hugh Januss]

I sorta have to agree here with Patrick...the place is just lousy with negativity...even when you are a left wing guy...talking about politics is fine...but bro and some of the other folks here, it is sorta ridiculous...and they get such hard ons when you mention them....even over politics...I used to like this forum stuff for about 9 months and it was sorta interesting via differ views....but whenever I think of it lately I just get sorta sick via my stomach....the negativity is unbelievable....like some weird 7th grade thing...and oh yeah man I wanna be part of your sick ****ing group and be one of you...just miss that numbnuts...

And yet, I have posted a few sarcatic comments here and there. Not so much negative but sarcastic (if you get it). And anytime I have said something that patrick doesn't like he has attacked me, calling me names, which I could really care less about, it's an internet forum after all, but now he comes out all sactimonious, like he's bared his soul and been attacked for it. Only Rubroma should feel like that, and yet patrick was one of the gang attacking him. While it is fine to agree with the theory you should examine the real practice before holding him up as some sort of shining beacon. Nobody here has the market cornered on negativity, and the guys who post the most don't even post the most negative stuff, at least not on a percentage basis.
When somebody posts something you don't like you can either ignore it or comment on it or if you really don't like it you can call him out about it. It's a forum go wild! If you post something that a large majority of forumites disagree with, you are probably gonna catch some crap. Does this mean everybody is "ganging up on you"? I guess that is one way of looking at it. Another might be to accept that you have an unpopular opinion and that some people are dicks and you might not like the way that they respond. You then have the choice to STFU or respond in kind, but if you respond in kind and then start whining about what dicks other people are then you are an uber dick.
That is my 2 cents, some may value it lower.

 

[patricknd]

And yet, I have posted a few sarcatic comments here and there. Not so much negative but sarcastic (if you get it). And anytime I have said something that patrick doesn't like he has attacked me, calling me names, which I could really care less about, it's an internet forum after all, but now he comes out all sactimonious, like he's bared his soul and been attacked for it. Only Rubroma should feel like that, and yet patrick was one of the gang attacking him. While it is fine to agree with the theory you should examine the real practice before holding him up as some sort of shining beacon. Nobody here has the market cornered on negativity, and the guys who post the most don't even post the most negative stuff, at least not on a percentage basis.
When somebody posts something you don't like you can either ignore it or comment on it or if you really don't like it you can call him out about it. It's a forum go wild! If you post something that a large majority of forumites disagree with, you are probably gonna catch some crap. Does this mean everybody is "ganging up on you"? I guess that is one way of looking at it. Another might be to accept that you have an unpopular opinion and that some people are dicks and you might not like the way that they respond. You then have the choice to STFU or respond in kind, but if you respond in kind and then start whining about what dicks other people are then you are an uber dick.
That is my 2 cents, some may value it lower.

i'm certainly no shining beacon, nor have i advertised myself as such.

go back and read the posts with rhubroma and you'll find that mine were in jest. do you really think i was serious in calling him an "eyetalion sumbiitch"

come on man, surely you're bright enough to get that.

in the last 3-4 weeks i have gone out of my way to be an *** on quite a few occasions, and other than elapid, who actually called me on it on behalf of someone else, (you, i believe) the only people who have objected are the ones at whom it was directed. don't you find that a little disturbing? all i managed to do was fit in with a large number of the frequent posters here.

i'm sorry, but i find that to be sad. you can disagree without being disagreeable.

 

[ChrisE]

I personally like the insults sprinkled within the responses. They are pretty funny, even when they are directed at me. I guess I'm weird like that.

 

[rhubroma]

I think that a certain ruthlessness in one's critical approach, however it might be unpopular with others, or even precisely because it is an unpopular criticism, needs to absolutely be said and that without the art of exaggeration, we'd be condemned to an awfully tedious life, a life not worth living. And there are some who have developed this art to an incredible pitch, who are of course the most illuminating people that can shed light on practically anything as I have come to know them. They also have the courage to do this even at the risk of being branded fools by those for whom such unpopular criticism is positively perverse and naturally reprehensible. The greatest happiness I know, though, is that of the aging fool who is free to indulge in his foolishness. Given the chance, we should proclaim ourselves fools by the age of forty at the latest and capitalize on our foolishness. It's foolishness that makes us happy, I've come to realize. Though thinking in this way, we naturally have the old against us, which means we basically have everything against us, where old in this sense means people who are unsettled by foolishness and also without a sense of irony. But they musn't deflect us from obtaining our goal, which is to replace the old with the new that we long for. Ultimately we have to abandon everything, discard everything, extinguish everything.

 

[ChrisE]

You come up with the most outlandish BS. WTF are you trying to say again, in English this time?

 

[patricknd]

I think that a certain ruthlessness in one's critical approach, however it might be unpopular with others, or even precisely because it is an unpopular criticism, needs to absolutely be said and that without the art of exaggeration, we'd be condemned to an awfully tedious life, a life not worth living. And there are some who have developed this art to an incredible pitch, who are of course the most illuminating people that can shed light on practically anything as I have come to know them. They also have the courage to do this even at the risk of being branded fools by those for whom such unpopular criticism is positively perverse and naturally reprehensible. The greatest happiness I know, though, is that of the aging fool who is free to indulge in his foolishness. Given the chance, we should proclaim ourselves fools by the age of forty at the latest and capitalize on our foolishness. It's foolishness that makes us happy, I've come to realize. Though thinking in this way, we naturally have the old against us, which means we basically have everything against us, where old in this sense means people who are unsettled by foolishness and also without a sense of irony. But they musn't deflect us from obtaining our goal, which is to replace the old with the new that we long for. Ultimately we have to abandon everything, discard everything, extinguish everything.

to quote the great american poet/philosopher slim pickens: " you use your mouth purttier than a 2 dollar *****."

but i don't agree with you.

 

[Hugh Januss]

You come up with the most outlandish BS. WTF are you trying to say again, in English this time?

What the hell is your new avatar suppose to be anyway?

 

[ChrisE]

What the hell is your new avatar suppose to be anyway?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Burningmonk.jpg

Some monk set himself on fire in the 60's in protest of the Vietnamese govt. It's also the cover of the first Rage Against the Machine album, which is one of my favorite albums and one of my favorite groups.

Their political positions are way far left, and their idealism is folly IMO. I like their music more than their lyrics, though even their most extreme positions make me think, which is the point.

 

[usedtobefast]

You come up with the most outlandish BS. WTF are you trying to say again, in English this time?

'you can't take it with you, so you might as well enjoy, now.'

 

[buckwheat]

I think that a certain ruthlessness in one's critical approach, however it might be unpopular with others, or even precisely because it is an unpopular criticism, needs to absolutely be said and that without the art of exaggeration, we'd be condemned to an awfully tedious life, a life not worth living. And there are some who have developed this art to an incredible pitch, who are of course the most illuminating people that can shed light on practically anything as I have come to know them. They also have the courage to do this even at the risk of being branded fools by those for whom such unpopular criticism is positively perverse and naturally reprehensible. The greatest happiness I know, though, is that of the aging fool who is free to indulge in his foolishness. Given the chance, we should proclaim ourselves fools by the age of forty at the latest and capitalize on our foolishness. It's foolishness that makes us happy, I've come to realize. Though thinking in this way, we naturally have the old against us, which means we basically have everything against us, where old in this sense means people who are unsettled by foolishness and also without a sense of irony. But they musn't deflect us from obtaining our goal, which is to replace the old with the new that we long for. Ultimately we have to abandon everything, discard everything, extinguish everything.

Or in the shorthand of a couple of other geniuses,

"All great truths begin as blasphemies." GB Shaw


or

"We all agree that your theory is crazy, but is it crazy enough?" Niels Bohr

You're a source of continuing wisdom and inspiration....keep it up.

 

[rhubroma]

You come up with the most outlandish BS. WTF are you trying to say again, in English this time?

And we were having such a nice conversation!

You are really a blockhead, Chris E., and just as it is difficult for me to lower myself down to your base way of thinking, it is equally challenging for you to raise yourself up to the loftiness of mine; as it is for the snake to become the falcon and vice-versa. Of course you should not take any of my rantings seriously or as a so-called affront to your personal dignity, Chris E., because you aren't really a blockhead, just play-acting a blockhead, I am not really an intellectual with a highly developed way of thinking, quite to the contrary am just play-acting to be an intellectual with a highly developed mind, you aren't really the snake but play-acting the snake and I am not actually the falcon, am only play-acting the falcon in keeping with this electronic forum and with this life, which is made up of exclusively play-actors not real people. Every where we go, Chris E., we thus do not encounter real people and real personalities, but only play-actors, artful simulators of real people and real personalities who perform with more or less virtuosity. At times we even come across a most stunning performance, though, and in the end we can only admire how artfully we have been mislead and deceived by such an incredible act.

It would have been obvious in any case to anyone who has followed the course of our discussions, the tram of our debates, that I was talking about above cultivating that extremely rare quality among people, even if in reality it is only those performing this rare gift, of being crazy enough to concede one's personality that purely ironic spirit that is the only thing which allows us to escape the meanness of this world and the vulgarity of this existence and to thus, by this crazyness and irony, be saved from this world and this existence by not being enslaved by this meanness and vulgarity which only the ironic fool can avoid. We do this by the amplification of such meanness and vulgarity, which after all surrounds us, in the exaggerations of our critical thinking, and, in this way, become bent on nothing short of the total destruction of this world which of course means the complete annihilation of this meanness and vulgarity which afflicts it and hence our existence: we obliterate everything that surrounds us to finally recreate from this destruction a world and an existence, our existence, that is actually worth living. But we can never truly change our own nature, Chris E., so we can only hope to make those corrections to our world and our existence that are absolutely necessary to achieving our goal, where every correction is a negation of something terrible, something that's lethal to our future well-being. This is what is know as a brilliant performance.

This is what is meant as natural science as my actual science, Chris E. In our goal of acheiving this brilliant performance, so-called, and making such natural science our actual science, we are naturally called to develop a sophisticated knowledge of politics, as our forays into the delicate matters associated with Obama and everything about Obama's presidency have here demonstrated, by being an attentive reader to all the dailies we can get our hands on, and be prepared to talk about anything connected with politics which are the result of the regular observations we have made and bring into the discussion at any moment many of those issues that not everyone, indeed extremely few, are talking about but those operating under the surface of the world political scene continually and decisively to determine the political realities and to relate them to our own current interests. And in our process of destroying this world and this existence, which is our natural science, we are always at a peak of excitement and readiness-to-explain resulting from our observations of primarily all the political events of the world, observations that sustain us, in our isolation which enables us to get on with our scientific work. And so it is self-evident that we would be tempted to elucidate our subject when we spoke about it and while we spoke about it, in clear language, in short sentences, using all our skill of phrasing while constantly intent upon simultaneously elucidating and reexamining our theme, always while conquering and reconquering our primary subject matter, natural science, during our every moment of preoccupation with this subject matter, since to think is to regain and recover, logically related to our own subject, that is, all our own possibilities or impossibilites and probabilities and improbabilities are always interelated to with all the others, Chris E.

 

[Alpe d'Huez]

As a slight diversion - In light of the recent Massey mine tragedy, I wonder if the true conservatives, or so-called Tea Party believe there should be less regulations of mining, as less government is better?

I mean, wouldn't that be the principle? They are always talking about less regulation; "Government is the problem", as Reagan said. So if government gets out of the way, things would run better. Thus, wouldn't the conservatives say even after this tragedy, we need less government intrusion and regulation of Massey and mining and it shouldn't be the government inspecting them at all, and to let the markets determine if Massey can stay in business?

 

[Anonymous]

As a slight diversion - In light of the recent Massey mine tragedy, I wonder if the true conservatives, or so-called Tea Party believe there should be less regulations of mining, as less government is better?

I mean, wouldn't that be the principle? They are always talking about less regulation; "Government is the problem", as Reagan said. So if government gets out of the way, things would run better. Thus, wouldn't the conservatives say even after this tragedy, we need less government intrusion and regulation of Massey and mining and it shouldn't be the government inspecting them at all, and to let the markets determine if Massey can stay in business?

I guess you missed the memo: All unions are evil and only fight for people to be fat and lazy, with a 2 hour work week, and 10 weeks of paid vacation. They never fight for anything good, so whatever it is they want in mines, the market is best suited to provide those things or not.

 

[ChrisE]

And we were having such a nice conversation!

You are really a blockhead, Chris E., and just as it is difficult for me to lower myself down to your base way of thinking, it is equally challenging for you to raise yourself up to the loftiness of mine; as it is for the snake to become the falcon and vice-versa. Of course you should not take any of my rantings seriously or as a so-called affront to your personal dignity, Chris E., because you aren't really a blockhead, just play-acting a blockhead, I am not really an intellectual with a highly developed way of thinking, quite to the contrary am just play-acting to be an intellectual with a highly developed mind, you aren't really the snake but play-acting the snake and I am not actually the falcon, am only play-acting the falcon in keeping with this electronic forum and with this life, which is made up of exclusively play-actors not real people. Every where we go, Chris E., we thus do not encounter real people and real personalities, but only play-actors, artful simulators of real people and real personalities who perform with more or less virtuosity. At times we even come across a most stunning performance, though, and in the end we can only admire how artfully we have been mislead and deceived by such an incredible act.

It would have been obvious in any case to anyone who has followed the course of our discussions, the tram of our debates, that I was talking about above cultivating that extremely rare quality among people, even if in reality it is only those performing this rare gift, of being crazy enough to concede one's personality that purely ironic spirit that is the only thing which allows us to escape the meanness of this world and the vulgarity of this existence and to thus, by this crazyness and irony, be saved from this world and this existence by not being enslaved by this meanness and vulgarity which only the ironic fool can avoid. We do this by the amplification of such meanness and vulgarity, which after all surrounds us, in the exaggerations of our critical thinking, and, in this way, become bent on nothing short of the total destruction of this world which of course means the complete annihilation of this meanness and vulgarity which afflicts it and hence our existence: we obliterate everything that surrounds us to finally recreate from this destruction a world and an existence, our existence, that is actually worth living. But we can never truly change our own nature, Chris E., so we can only hope to make those corrections to our world and our existence that are absolutely necessary to achieving our goal, where every correction is a negation of something terrible, something that's lethal to our future well-being. This is what is know as a brilliant performance.

This is what is meant as natural science as my actual science, Chris E. In our goal of acheiving this brilliant performance, so-called, and making such natural science our actual science, we are naturally called to develop a sophisticated knowledge of politics, as our forays into the delicate matters associated with Obama and everything about Obama's presidency have here demonstrated, by being an attentive reader to all the dailies we can get our hands on, and be prepared to talk about anything connected with politics which are the result of the regular observations we have made and bring into the discussion at any moment many of those issues that not everyone, indeed extremely few, are talking about but those operating under the surface of the world political scene continually and decisively to determine the political realities and to relate them to our own current interests. And in our process of destroying this world and this existence, which is our natural science, we are always at a peak of excitement and readiness-to-explain resulting from our observations of primarily all the political events of the world, observations that sustain us, in our isolation which enables us to get on with our scientific work. And so it is self-evident that we would be tempted to elucidate our subject when we spoke about it and while we spoke about it, in clear language, in short sentences, using all our skill of phrasing while constantly intent upon simultaneously elucidating and reexamining our theme, always while conquering and reconquering our primary subject matter, natural science, during our every moment of preoccupation with this subject matter, since to think is to regain and recover, logically related to our own subject, that is, all our own possibilities or impossibilites and probabilities and improbabilities are always interelated to with all the others, Chris E.

Umm, what?

You said head. And log.

 

[ChrisE]

As a slight diversion - In light of the recent Massey mine tragedy, I wonder if the true conservatives, or so-called Tea Party believe there should be less regulations of mining, as less government is better?

I mean, wouldn't that be the principle? They are always talking about less regulation; "Government is the problem", as Reagan said. So if government gets out of the way, things would run better. Thus, wouldn't the conservatives say even after this tragedy, we need less government intrusion and regulation of Massey and mining and it shouldn't be the government inspecting them at all, and to let the markets determine if Massey can stay in business?

That's the fallacy. In a perfect world where there were coal mines to choose from, like bubble gum, maybe that would work.

Things that are essential to society, like utilities, health insurance, etc. the competitive capitalistic model breaks down. How the fark can competitive capitalism put a coal mine out of business?

The right distracts the rubes with emotional issues while deregulation in uncompetitive business is the real issue behind the GOP. Note I say "uncompetitive", because I am all for it in the right circumstances.

Useful idiots.

 

[Hugh Januss]

As a slight diversion - In light of the recent Massey mine tragedy, I wonder if the true conservatives, or so-called Tea Party believe there should be less regulations of mining, as less government is better?

I mean, wouldn't that be the principle? They are always talking about less regulation; "Government is the problem", as Reagan said. So if government gets out of the way, things would run better. Thus, wouldn't the conservatives say even after this tragedy, we need less government intrusion and regulation of Massey and mining and it shouldn't be the government inspecting them at all, and to let the markets determine if Massey can stay in business?

I believe the conservative model calls for being against all government regulation unless it is their friends or family dying in the mine.
In that case sue the bastids.

 

[Hugh Januss]

Umm, what?

You said head. And log.

I'm unclear, was that more playacting?

 

[scribe]

Let's just hope it doesn't mean he is swinging back towards having a crack-tranny for an avatar.

 

[rhubroma]

I believe the conservative model calls for being against all government regulation unless it is their friends or family dying in the mine.
In that case sue the bastids.

The conservative model for deregulation pretty much means: no rules to stop us from making profit, every rule to protect us from society. In the first case any rule, even the most responsible rule, is tantamount to being governed by the most oppresive of regimes. In the second case all rules which negate any form of social protection are the equivalent of freedom and democracy.

 

[BroDeal]

As a slight diversion - In light of the recent Massey mine tragedy, I wonder if the true conservatives, or so-called Tea Party believe there should be less regulations of mining, as less government is better?

I mean, wouldn't that be the principle? They are always talking about less regulation; "Government is the problem", as Reagan said. So if government gets out of the way, things would run better. Thus, wouldn't the conservatives say even after this tragedy, we need less government intrusion and regulation of Massey and mining and it shouldn't be the government inspecting them at all, and to let the markets determine if Massey can stay in business?

You need to drink the Milton Friedman and Allen Greenspan Kool-Aid. You see the threat of lawsuits will encourage the company to make the mine safe. A bad work environment where the workers risk death will dirve up labor costs, thus also encouraging the company to make the mine safe. The fact that the majority of these two effects won't take place until after people have been killed is not something that we will dwell upon. It's really pretty simple. There is no regulation needed at all. This sort of thing will sort itself out eventually.

Of course a more rational person who does not have faith in an idealized view of human behavior that is little different than faith shown by Karl Marx might think that a really simple solution is to stop fining companies and start putting people in prison. You run a mining company with 1300 safety violations in a five year period, some of which killed people, you go straight to the Big House.

 

[kangyuta]

This is what the scammers expect, the check will NY Escort only bounce about 3 weeks to a month later at which point your bank will take back the money leaving you short of the shipping money. The best way of avoiding this fraud is not to sell your vehicle to someone who wants to pay the shipper.I NY Escorts hope all this hasn't scared you away from the Internet, If you are sensible and wary about offers that seem too good to be true then you should be Ok, just NY Asian Escorts apply the same commonsense you use in everyday life, after all if a stranger walked up to you in the street and said "Hi I am from your bank what's NY Asian Escort your credit card number and PIN"