17
   

Is the USA turning into a dictadorship or is it just paranoia?

 
 
djjd62
 
  2  
Reply Wed 6 Oct, 2010 06:13 am
@Merry Andrew,
well said, somewhere along the line we've deemed ourselves as important to the planet, i don't buy it, i suggest that the planet would be better off if man as an evolutionary branch had not existed, the last time i checked, the mice hadn't filled landfills with plastic bottles and disposable diapers
0 Replies
 
manored
 
  0  
Reply Wed 6 Oct, 2010 10:48 am
@Merry Andrew,
Merry Andrew wrote:

roger wrote:

Not following your reasoning on this. There really isn't a point unless you believe the whole deal were created by something with a purpose.


No, that's not what I'm saying at all, rog. The other fella said that without man's presence there is no point. My point is that man's presence or absence here is not the point, if there should be a point to the whole shebang. It's elevating the importance of the human species back up to where we were in the Middle Ages, i.e. just below the angels.I don't believe man has any more importance here than a mollusk. We are a predatory, parasytic species.
Man is important because... WE are man. I think it should be obvious that the instrument through which the world is experienced is more important than the world itself. Its not that humans are specially important from an universal point of view... we are not. But we are specially important from the HUMAN point of view.

To the universe it makes no difference whenever the planet explodes or not. To the planet it also makes no difference. Life has no opinions about it either. Only we humans would have something to say about it, at least that we can reconize as an opinion. Like some philosopher whose name I dont remember said, "man is the measure of all things".

djjd62 wrote:

well said, somewhere along the line we've deemed ourselves as important to the planet, i don't buy it, i suggest that the planet would be better off if man as an evolutionary branch had not existed, the last time i checked, the mice hadn't filled landfills with plastic bottles and disposable diapers
How would the planet be "better off" if it has no objective? The planet simply exists, its not a conscient being that placed itself here to wield life. And even if we go down the idealistic path of that it is and it did, then why assume that what man is doing to it is not what it wants? Why assume that the planet likes forests more than wastelands? This is applying human views to this theoric cosmic being. Humans generally like forests more than wastelands, but that doesnt means that the planet, if it is alive, thinks the same way.

But I dont think that the planet is alive, that wouldnt make much sense. Its just a ball of mud floating in space.

Pemerson wrote:

Is that all the evidence you needed, a video about thumbscanning? Because of that we are a dictatorship? Actually, American parents don't like anyone doing anything with their children without even informing them, asking them for permission. Calm down. Maybe you are hoping this country will collapse, fail, die, fade away
I dont count that as evidence, just an opinion. It was just the "final spark" that lead me to making this thread after aeons of seeing similar opinions.

I hold no ill will against the USA. I actually hope it wont crash down upon itself, because that would have a severe impact in the whole world, obviously.
Merry Andrew
 
  1  
Reply Wed 6 Oct, 2010 10:57 am
@manored,
manored wrote
Man is important because... WE are man. I think it should be obvious that the instrument through which the world is experienced is more important than the world itself.

How is that obvious? Your comment makes no sense, manored.
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 6 Oct, 2010 11:45 am
@Fido,
Fido wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:

There would be no point to this planet we call earth without conservatives.
I would have bet without hearing from you that you knew the difference between points and dildo's, even if dildos have a point, as you must well know...

I would guess that you live in the northeast US and keep Astroglide in reach at all times...
manored
 
  0  
Reply Wed 6 Oct, 2010 11:50 am
@Merry Andrew,
Merry Andrew wrote:

manored wrote
Man is important because... WE are man. I think it should be obvious that the instrument through which the world is experienced is more important than the world itself.

How is that obvious? Your comment makes no sense, manored.
Aka: sacrifying your life is nosensical because you wont be there to experience the results of that action.

In the other hand, there is no particular reason to live either, so I think self-sacrifice makes sense if you cannot accept how the world would be without your sacrifice, as it at least provides emotional fulfilment before the act.

I find it very unlikely that anyone loves their idea of ideal world more than the humans that are important to their lives, to the point of wishing to sacrify themselves and all of humanity for that ideal world. Ah, well, maybe some people do.
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  0  
Reply Wed 6 Oct, 2010 12:02 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:

Fido wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:

There would be no point to this planet we call earth without conservatives.
I would have bet without hearing from you that you knew the difference between points and dildo's, even if dildos have a point, as you must well know...

I would guess that you live in the northeast US and keep Astroglide in reach at all times...

Rightish on one; and wrong on two...
0 Replies
 
IRFRANK
 
  2  
Reply Thu 7 Oct, 2010 05:38 pm
@Fido,
I agree except for the last part. I would love to see the change you speak of, and I believe President Obama would like it too, but is it possible? Look how difficult it has been for him to do what he has done. The 'powers that be' are very well entrenched and I'm not sure anyone can effect much change with four year terms. I actually think the President has decided to not worry about all the rhetoric and is actually trying to do the best job he can do, on a daily basis. I'm not sure what more he can do, with the fractious political environment we have. The President is a centrist and he was a centrist when he ran for office. If anyone paid attention to his proposals, he has been true to them.

There is also a racial angle, but I don't think it is that meaningful. It does add fuel to a lot of the misguided hate, but I see it as irrelevant noise. Hopefully it will die out, but I have been hoping that for 50 years.

Long term our country is in trouble. We have a lot of very big, external influences to deal with and we are ignoring them. 40 years after the first fuel crisis we are still dependent upon mideast oil, why? We are not the economic power we were and we are ineffective in doing things in our own best interest. We have let our education system disintegrate at the lower grades level. A college education once was available to most anyone, now it is very expensive, unless you can play football.

I am also disappointed in what's happened since the election, but I don't blame it on Obama. I'm not sure what he could have done differently that would have changed things.
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Oct, 2010 05:40 pm
@HexHammer,
Please explain and justify the dictator comment?

How?
IRFRANK
 
  2  
Reply Thu 7 Oct, 2010 05:41 pm
@HexHammer,
Unfortunately, it's not just you.
0 Replies
 
HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Oct, 2010 09:10 pm
@IRFRANK,
IRFRANK wrote:

Please explain and justify the dictator comment?

How?
When GW Bush abused the pledge of loyalty to draw other countries into the illegal Iraq war, without any evidence, without any mandate ..only a fool can't see that as dictatorial, as cruelty, as moral and ethical decay. No wonder they lost that war since it pissed so many off, specially the colatteral damage of "liberating" Iraq.

It puzzles me so that you ask, is it because you feel that USA suddenly have turned into a nice guy again with Obama? ..now washed clean of all sin?
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Oct, 2010 09:42 pm
@HexHammer,
I think we all agree at this point that going to war was a mistake, but if you recall at the time our actions were approved by congress.

All this happened during Bush's term and he was followed by a duly elected president.

Now you may not agree with our actions but that hardly makes the president a dictator.

We lost the Iraq war?

I don't agree with many of our actions and I am free to express that disagreement, without fear.

You need to search elsewhere for your hatred justification.
HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Thu 7 Oct, 2010 10:43 pm
@IRFRANK,
IRFRANK wrote:

I think we all agree at this point that going to war was a mistake, but if you recall at the time our actions were approved by congress.

All this happened during Bush's term and he was followed by a duly elected president.

Now you may not agree with our actions but that hardly makes the president a dictator.

We lost the Iraq war?

I don't agree with many of our actions and I am free to express that disagreement, without fear.

You need to search elsewhere for your hatred justification.
Just because some dictatorial president gets his will through the congress, suddenly makes his action ...not dictatorial? How does this congresional thing make the Iraq war legal? ..intrusion of a soverin state which has no relation to 9/11, there was NO evidence, and you sit there and make lame excuses, spare me!
It is the clear marks of a dictatorial move, it's the results that counts, not the process prior a crime.

What about the patriot act?

I would encourage you to read up on "group think" and "flock instinct".
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Oct, 2010 12:35 am
@IRFRANK,
IRFRANK wrote:

I agree except for the last part. I would love to see the change you speak of, and I believe President Obama would like it too, but is it possible? Look how difficult it has been for him to do what he has done. The 'powers that be' are very well entrenched and I'm not sure anyone can effect much change with four year terms. I actually think the President has decided to not worry about all the rhetoric and is actually trying to do the best job he can do, on a daily basis. I'm not sure what more he can do, with the fractious political environment we have. The President is a centrist and he was a centrist when he ran for office. If anyone paid attention to his proposals, he has been true to them.

There is also a racial angle, but I don't think it is that meaningful. It does add fuel to a lot of the misguided hate, but I see it as irrelevant noise. Hopefully it will die out, but I have been hoping that for 50 years.

Long term our country is in trouble. We have a lot of very big, external influences to deal with and we are ignoring them. 40 years after the first fuel crisis we are still dependent upon mideast oil, why? We are not the economic power we were and we are ineffective in doing things in our own best interest. We have let our education system disintegrate at the lower grades level. A college education once was available to most anyone, now it is very expensive, unless you can play football.

I am also disappointed in what's happened since the election, but I don't blame it on Obama. I'm not sure what he could have done differently that would have changed things.

To get elected to anything one must sell themselves to the rich... This is a lot easier done for those with formal educations such as law with a lot of built in support for property and capital, and yet once in, if not given to truly radical thinking, only old ideas and methods will seem worthy... To have people formally of Wall Street, and accepting of Free Market economics as advisors, he was sending the message that no revolutionary change was likely... He promised change, but nothing about his government promised change; and the people who voted for change are still there, and still desparately in need of change..
revelette
 
  2  
Reply Fri 8 Oct, 2010 08:10 am
@IRFRANK,
This is a very insightful post which makes sense of what happened to all the maybe naive hope we (some of us) had when Obama was elected president.

BTW funny
0 Replies
 
manored
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Oct, 2010 01:30 pm
@HexHammer,
HexHammer wrote:

Just because some dictatorial president gets his will through the congress, suddenly makes his action ...not dictatorial? How does this congresional thing make the Iraq war legal? ..intrusion of a soverin state which has no relation to 9/11, there was NO evidence, and you sit there and make lame excuses, spare me!
It is the clear marks of a dictatorial move, it's the results that counts, not the process prior a crime.
dictatorship and excessive and unjustified violence against another country arent the same thing.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Oct, 2010 01:36 pm
@manored,
manored wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

Just because some dictatorial president gets his will through the congress, suddenly makes his action ...not dictatorial? How does this congresional thing make the Iraq war legal? ..intrusion of a soverin state which has no relation to 9/11, there was NO evidence, and you sit there and make lame excuses, spare me!
It is the clear marks of a dictatorial move, it's the results that counts, not the process prior a crime.
dictatorship and excessive and unjustified violence against another country arent the same thing.

Part and parcel my man... Before Ceasare conquered the world he first conquered the Romans... Ditto for Alexander, Elizabeth, Napoleon, Bismark, and Hitler... The first victory of tyrants is over their own kind, and securing their base, they attack all of humanity...
manored
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Oct, 2010 02:13 pm
@Fido,
Fido wrote:

Part and parcel my man... Before Ceasare conquered the world he first conquered the Romans... Ditto for Alexander, Elizabeth, Napoleon, Bismark, and Hitler... The first victory of tyrants is over their own kind, and securing their base, they attack all of humanity...
The fact that dictadorship and brutality go hand-in-hand doesnt makes then the same thing.

We have too little words, I dont want to have even less =)
HexHammer
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Oct, 2010 02:46 pm
@manored,
manored wrote:
The fact that dictadorship and brutality go hand-in-hand doesnt makes then the same thing.

We have too little words, I dont want to have even less =)
Get real, go look up the dictionary, you can be a dictator without violence.
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Oct, 2010 04:09 pm
@HexHammer,
HexHammer wrote:

manored wrote:
The fact that dictadorship and brutality go hand-in-hand doesnt makes then the same thing.

We have too little words, I dont want to have even less =)
Get real, go look up the dictionary, you can be a dictator without violence.

Sure; possible, but there has never been one... Even the Pope and the president have the threat of violence behind them...
0 Replies
 
IRFRANK
 
  1  
Reply Fri 8 Oct, 2010 09:53 pm
@Fido,
I don't think Obama sold himself to the rich. He raised a lot of money from a lot of middle class folks. I sent him money, a first for me and I suspect I am not alone. Drastic change on Wall St. is risky and difficult. Look how hard what little he has tried to do has been. I agree we need bigger change, but how to make it happen is a difficult question. And, remember the bail outs were in process well before Obama took office, and much less controlled. In my opinion, Paulson simply stole a few hundred billion to save his cronies. The alternative may have been much worse for all of us.

I've said it before, you want to understand Wall street and the bail outs, read 13 Bankers.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/16/2024 at 06:47:29