2
   

Information control, or, How to get to Orwellian governance

 
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Aug, 2006 10:49 am
Kelticwizard joined the legion of centrist to left posters that have noted Bernie/Massa's inability to read well.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Aug, 2006 03:13 pm
blatham wrote:
Promotion of fear in the populace.

2,978..........number of people killed in 9/11 (including five from anthrax, source unknown as strain originated in a US lab)

700,142.......number of people killed in same year from heart disease
553,768.......same year, from cancer
101,537.......same year, from accidents
30,622.........same year, from suicide
17,330.........same year, from homocide
5,432...........same year, from workplace injuries
3,247...........same year, from drowning


At least I have some control over some of the things you mention, blatham, such as not smoking, not hanging out in dark alleys, or jumping into dangerous rivers. And the upside potential for deaths from terrorist acts does not have much limit on it, especially if Democrats strip away the ability of the government to catch them.

Blatham, your party, I presume it is your party, the Democrats, are experts at fear mongering and demagoguery. Remember the black churches burning, Willie Horton, children starving because school lunches are reduced, old people eating dog food because their social security checks are reduced to nothing? Remember welfare reform? It was predicted to be a disaster, but of course now Clinton is claiming credit for it. Of course, he vetoed it or rejected it at least once, maybe twice, I don't remember, before he had to sign it because he had run out of options.
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Aug, 2006 03:19 pm
Okie- Remember--compassion for those who have been critically ill- Go easy!!!
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Aug, 2006 03:20 pm
Okie- Remember--compassion for those who have been critically ill- Go easy!!!
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Aug, 2006 04:06 pm
okie wrote:
blatham wrote:
Promotion of fear in the populace.

2,978..........number of people killed in 9/11 (including five from anthrax, source unknown as strain originated in a US lab)

700,142.......number of people killed in same year from heart disease
553,768.......same year, from cancer
101,537.......same year, from accidents
30,622.........same year, from suicide
17,330.........same year, from homocide
5,432...........same year, from workplace injuries
3,247...........same year, from drowning


At least I have some control over some of the things you mention, blatham, such as not smoking, not hanging out in dark alleys, or jumping into dangerous rivers. And the upside potential for deaths from terrorist acts does not have much limit on it, especially if Democrats strip away the ability of the government to catch them.

Blatham, your party, I presume it is your party, the Democrats, are experts at fear mongering and demagoguery. Remember the black churches burning, Willie Horton, children starving because school lunches are reduced, old people eating dog food because their social security checks are reduced to nothing? Remember welfare reform? It was predicted to be a disaster, but of course now Clinton is claiming credit for it. Of course, he vetoed it or rejected it at least once, maybe twice, I don't remember, before he had to sign it because he had run out of options.


Indeed you do have control over some of those things. Others you do not. If the issue is lessening human suffering, then those figures loom in importance. If the issue is some sort of idiotic national manliness, then 300 people killed by a terrorist will be far more "important" than unsafe cars or the sale of cigarettes.

I'm Canadian and don't belong to any political party even there. I once helped out in an election in 1967 for an exceptional man. That's it for me and parties.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Aug, 2006 04:23 pm
Sorry, as a Canadian, I forgot you can't be a Democrat here, but anyway I assumed that was where your sympathies resided.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Aug, 2006 04:58 pm
okie wrote:
Sorry, as a Canadian, I forgot you can't be a Democrat here, but anyway I assumed that was where your sympathies resided.


I'm a liberal. Of course, that term actually means something quite different from what the modern American right suggests it means. In Canada or most European countries, I'd be pretty mainstream. That puts me far far left from the viewpoint of either TownHall or the Taliban.

You could identify my political stance (in most cases) with that of Lincoln, or Mark Twain, or the Jimmy Stewart character from "It's A Good Life" or Jimmy Carter, or jesus, or Ghandi, or Tutu. I think government has no place in our bedrooms or chapels. I think adults can make their own decisions about, say, whether to have a beer or smoke a joint. I think some people and some businesses are selfish and criminal and so laws are necessary in such cases. Pretty normal liberal stuff.
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Aug, 2006 06:16 pm
Okie- You really must do a search on A2K to learn what happened to the poor man. You don't wish to be a party to another seizure, do you?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Aug, 2006 05:25 am
Quote:
Positive Press on Iraq Is Aim of U.S. Contract

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, August 31, 2006; Page A20

U.S. military leaders in Baghdad have put out for bid a two-year, $20 million public relations contract that calls for extensive monitoring of U.S. and Middle Eastern media in an effort to promote more positive coverage of news from Iraq.

The contract calls for assembling a database of selected news stories and assessing their tone as part of a program to provide "public relations products" that would improve coverage of the military command's performance, according to a statement of work attached to the proposal.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/30/AR2006083003011.html
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Aug, 2006 06:27 pm
blatham -- I attended a teacher seminar at Orchard House, which served for a time as the home of the Alcott family and the site of Bronson Alcott's School of Philosophy. While in Concord, MA, I had the opportunity to visit Emerson's home.

Now, to back track a bit, when I was in high school (1961-65), it was held that the problem with American conservatism was that it was rooted in Calvinism. While it was a simplistic analysis, it contains a very large grain of truth.

So, when I saw all the books that Emerson loaned to young Louisa May Alcott and the piano he allowed her sister to practice on and the paintings and engravings he allowed her other sister to copy in order to learn to draw, I thought, "How Christian of Emerson! What a wonderful and generous man he was."

I immediately laughed because Emerson and the other Transcendentalists were not Calvinists.

Then I thought of how, in Michigan, a prospective English teacher had to take a course at some level (sophomore survey class to Ph.D. seminar) on American Lit. 1830-65. I could just hear Okie and Bernie/Massa complaining that this material was inappropriate and that they hoped that no teacher would incorporate such left-leaning works in their curriculum!
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Aug, 2006 08:03 pm
plainoldme wrote:

Now, to back track a bit, when I was in high school (1961-65), it was held that the problem with American conservatism was that it was rooted in Calvinism. While it was a simplistic analysis, it contains a very large grain of truth.


So enlighten me, pom, how John Calvin, a guy that lived a few hundred years ago, a French theologian and lawyer, has anything to do with American conservatism. Explain to me how his ideas found their way into the minds of the first American settlers and later immigrants and how this persists into today.
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Thu 31 Aug, 2006 08:51 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Let me give you a hint .... the ironic portion is contained somewhere in the following:


Quote:
Collectively, three conservatives not only managed to miss Blatham's easy to grasp point-that because one member of a group says something, you cannot assume any other member of that group agrees-they come down on him for holding the exact opposite view from the one he just expressed!

I know this is looking like a tough election for conservatives, but is everyone on the Right actually in mental breakdown? It certainly seems so.


Tico, the irony still escapes.

Blatham made a post illustrating the principle that just because one Republican says blacks are inferior, it is wrong to assume any other Republicans feel that way.

Okie somehow twisted that into claiming that Blatham said that Republicans think that blacks are inferior, Bernard R followed with a post asking Okie to "go easy" on Blatham, (thereby implying that Okie's post made sense), and Mysteryman followed with his post showing that he also thought Blatham said that Republicans think blacks are inferior.

Blatham said that it is wrong to assume that all members of a group says something, that others in the group agree. He might be right.

However, when three members of a group say something, that is another thing altogether.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Sep, 2006 01:12 am
You fail to recognize that my comment was pertaining to blatham's debating style employing demagoguery, rather than specifically blatham's point. Of course, blatham is insinuating something with his statement, and it is obviously revealing as to blatham's mindset, which I think is rotten to the core. He is not fooling anyone when he uses statements as mentioned in the following:

Blatham made a post illustrating the principle that just because one Republican says blacks are inferior, it is wrong to assume any other Republicans feel that way.

I can also point out that just because many liberals appear to think blacks are inferior, it is wrong to automatically assume blatham might feel that way without substantiating it for sure.
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Sep, 2006 01:20 am
Okie- I don't think there would be many people who would say that "Blacks are inferior". The reason that is so is that such a statement would be clearly racist--Attributing a whole class of people with immutable characteristics based on race.

However, People can say

l. Statistics show that Asian families have a very high median Family Income

or

2. Statistics show that African-Americans have a very high rate of incarceration.

The statement "Blacks are inferior" is a RED HERRING!!!
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Sep, 2006 01:32 am
Libs are going to jump on me here, but if you listen to black conservatives, they will agree with me on what I am about to say. Democrats do not say it of course, but by their touted policies over the past decades in the form of affirmative action programs and other special programs wherein the lowering of standards for minorities are employed, they imply that blacks cannot perform on an equal playing field with the rest of the population, so they need those crutches supplied by government, and the Democrats are johnny on the spot to provide it. Such continuation of policies imply their belief that blacks are inferior. Conservative blacks are tired of it and are speaking out, at which point they are jumped on with viciousness not only by Democrats but fellow black people like Jesse Jackson that make their living on the continuance of the "woe is me" syndrome suffered by segments of the black community.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Sep, 2006 05:18 am
plainoldme wrote:
blatham -- I attended a teacher seminar at Orchard House, which served for a time as the home of the Alcott family and the site of Bronson Alcott's School of Philosophy. While in Concord, MA, I had the opportunity to visit Emerson's home.

Now, to back track a bit, when I was in high school (1961-65), it was held that the problem with American conservatism was that it was rooted in Calvinism. While it was a simplistic analysis, it contains a very large grain of truth.

So, when I saw all the books that Emerson loaned to young Louisa May Alcott and the piano he allowed her sister to practice on and the paintings and engravings he allowed her other sister to copy in order to learn to draw, I thought, "How Christian of Emerson! What a wonderful and generous man he was."

I immediately laughed because Emerson and the other Transcendentalists were not Calvinists.

Then I thought of how, in Michigan, a prospective English teacher had to take a course at some level (sophomore survey class to Ph.D. seminar) on American Lit. 1830-65. I could just hear Okie and Bernie/Massa complaining that this material was inappropriate and that they hoped that no teacher would incorporate such left-leaning works in their curriculum!


I know. What a weirdly reactive period we are in. Huge fines for a naked boob. Joe McCarthy resurrected. Mark Twain, if writing today, would be labelled "anti-American". Our faith in universal education suffers a significant blow as a consequence.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Sep, 2006 05:33 am
okie wrote:
plainoldme wrote:

Now, to back track a bit, when I was in high school (1961-65), it was held that the problem with American conservatism was that it was rooted in Calvinism. While it was a simplistic analysis, it contains a very large grain of truth.


So enlighten me, pom, how John Calvin, a guy that lived a few hundred years ago, a French theologian and lawyer, has anything to do with American conservatism. Explain to me how his ideas found their way into the minds of the first American settlers and later immigrants and how this persists into today.


Start HERE. This will give you some clues in the direction of your questions and provide you with further direction for study of American history and the history of christian sects in America.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Sep, 2006 05:37 am
okie wrote:
You fail to recognize that my comment was pertaining to blatham's debating style employing demagoguery, rather than specifically blatham's point. Of course, blatham is insinuating something with his statement, and it is obviously revealing as to blatham's mindset, which I think is rotten to the core. He is not fooling anyone when he uses statements as mentioned in the following:

Blatham made a post illustrating the principle that just because one Republican says blacks are inferior, it is wrong to assume any other Republicans feel that way.

I can also point out that just because many liberals appear to think blacks are inferior, it is wrong to automatically assume blatham might feel that way without substantiating it for sure.


Rotten to it's (possibly satan-worshipping) core.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Sep, 2006 05:45 am
From a recent RNC email to supporters...
Quote:
When voters are informed about the clear choice between our Party's vision and the Democrats' radical agenda to cut and run in the War on Terror, the Democrats' media-driven lead in the polls is erased and Republicans are in a strong position to maintain our majorities in Congress.


Interesting to analyze this short sentence.

- "vision" versus "radical agenda to cut and run in the War on Terror"

- the "Democrats' media-driven lead in the polls".... it's the media's fault that the majority of Americans think Bush is doing lousy and the war in Iraq a costly failure.

- some rah rah at the close
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Fri 1 Sep, 2006 09:34 am
okie wrote:

So enlighten me, pom, how John Calvin, a guy that lived a few hundred years ago, a French theologian and lawyer, has anything to do with American conservatism. Explain to me how his ideas found their way into the minds of the first American settlers and later immigrants and how this persists into today.


I said American conservatives of the 1960s, not the first American settlers.

However, the ideas of Calvin were known to the earliest New Englanders. You should have learned this in your history classes.

Does predestination ring a bell?
0 Replies
 
 

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 © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 01/11/2025 at 08:05:33