okie
 
  0  
Sun 27 Sep, 2009 09:22 pm
@Rockhead,
Rockhead wrote:

"it could be suicide"

Really... Rolling Eyes

please tell me how that woulda worked, okie.

I don't have a clue, Rockhead, all I know is the authorities have not ruled anything out yet, have they, except that it was an unnatural death. To be honest, I haven't spent much time looking into the stories about this until this evening.

"State Trooper Don Trosper said it was clear this wasn't a natural death but said all other possibilities were being considered."

http://news.aol.com/article/census-worker-bill-sparkmans-hanging/684969
Rockhead
 
  1  
Sun 27 Sep, 2009 09:24 pm
@okie,
"I don't have a clue, Rockhead"

agreed.
okie
 
  0  
Sun 27 Sep, 2009 09:29 pm
@Rockhead,
But I suppose you already know who killed him and why? Is that right?
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  -1  
Sun 27 Sep, 2009 09:37 pm
http://michellemalkin.com/2009/09/25/i-killed-the-kentucky-census-worker-along-with-every-conservative-in-america/

William E. Sparkman, 51, of Laurel County, Ky., reportedly had the word “fed” scrawled on his chest. That raised questions about whether he was killed because of hard feelings against the government and catapulted the mysterious death into a national story.

However, on Thursday, police had not confirmed Sparkman was even doing census work in Clay County at the time he died, said Capt. Lisa Rudzinski, commander of the state police post handling the investigation.

One media report " which quoted a census official saying a computer Sparkman used for census work was found in his truck near the cemetery " wasn’t true, Rudzinski said.

Police found Sparkman’s red pickup truck, but the computer wasn’t in it, she said.


To recap:

1) Police have not determined yet that this was murder.

2) He wasn’t hanging from the tree.

3) It hasn’t been determined if he was even working as a Census data collector at the time of his death or whether that job had anything at all to do with his demise.

But:

I killed the Kentucky Census worker " along with every man and woman in America who is guilty of having said or written anything critical of government.

The criminalization of conservatism continues.
Rockhead
 
  1  
Sun 27 Sep, 2009 09:38 pm
@okie,
would you care to wager on whether it was suicide?
okie
 
  0  
Sun 27 Sep, 2009 09:56 pm
@Rockhead,
Rockhead wrote:

would you care to wager on whether it was suicide?

Get serious, Rocky. I already told you I don't know how he died, okay? Suicide does not look likely, probably one chance in a hundred, but wait until the investigation is done. If he was murdered, which is what appears to be the case, it tells us nothing as to why or by who, all of that will have to be investigated. There is a chance that some things will never be known.

The point of all of this is that I believe it is the media spreading fear mongering, not people like Michele Bachman or Glen Beck, who are doing nothing more than talking politics and policy.
Rockhead
 
  2  
Sun 27 Sep, 2009 09:57 pm
@okie,
you get serious.

you are the one propping up your argument with impossible long shots.

have you no shame?
okie
 
  0  
Sun 27 Sep, 2009 10:04 pm
@Rockhead,
Look, a man was found dead, how come all of a sudden we are all supposed to know exactly how he died and who did it? The only argument I am making is that we don't know. Yes, I mean it, you get serious. Admit you don't know either. I think the media has gone off the deep end. And the libs are breathlessly hoping they can make something out of this. Talk about fear mongering, good grief!
Rockhead
 
  2  
Sun 27 Sep, 2009 10:06 pm
@okie,
okie, you make me ashamed to live in the next state from you.

your blinders do a very fine job for you...

good night.
okie
 
  0  
Sun 27 Sep, 2009 10:10 pm
@Rockhead,
Talk about goofy, are you that goofy that you apparently believe I am supposed to know why the guy died and who did it? Since you apparently know, please let us in on all the knowledge you have Sir.

I am still trying to figure out the liberal mind, or if they have one.
revel
 
  1  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 07:26 am
To recap what we do know:

He was a census worker.

The word Fed was written across his chest in a felt tipped pen.

His Census ID was found taped to his shoulder and head area.

He was found in a position to give the impression he was hanged.

Witness Says Census Worker Was Naked, Bound

It might be that if someone did murder him, they only wanted it to look like a hate crime of federal or census workers or it may very well be that someone murdered a census worker. I think it highly unlikely it wasn't a homicide, but I guess we'll see.

I am not saying the fear mongering on the right is directly or even indirectly responsible for his death no matter how it unfolds. (If i did give that indication, I take it back as I now realize that was going too far) I do continue to say that ever since Obama has been in office, there has been an unusual amount of vitriol from the right which has been feeding a mood that is ugly and it a bit scary.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  3  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 08:18 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

I am still trying to figure out the liberal mind, or if they have one.

I can tell you for a fact that they don't have "one". Since they are many they should have many minds. Is this different from conservatives?
okie
 
  0  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 08:44 am
@FreeDuck,
Free Duck, I am going to make a request. Can you give us your philosophy of political systems, in some detail if you wish. I have found that to understand posts here by anyone, it helps immensely to know where you reside in terms of your foundational beliefs. I have made no bones about being a conservative and why, and I think it would be helpful to find out what you believe and why. The reason I am asking is that your posts have been a bit of an enigma to me, it seems they were somewhat inconsistently liberal or on the left, but of late have become more and more liberal or more left all the time.

In regard to the liberal mind, I am not claiming you all think the same, but I do think there are usually certain common denominators.

An example of helpfulness, cyclops admitted he likes aspects of socialism or Marxism, along with some aspects of capitalism, and he also thinks animals should have as much rights as humans. He thinks it is arrogant of humans to feel special, or of more importance than animals. I think this belief has its roots in the rejection of Judeo-Christian philosophy, wherein man has dominion over the earth and the animals.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 08:50 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

Free Duck, I am going to make a request. Can you give us your philosophy of political systems, in some detail if you wish. I have found that to understand posts here by anyone, it helps immensely to know where you reside in terms of your foundational beliefs. I have made no bones about being a conservative and why, and I think it would be helpful to find out what you believe and why. The reason I am asking is that your posts have been a bit of an enigma to me, it seems they were somewhat inconsistently liberal or on the left, but of late have become more and more liberal or more left all the time.

In regard to the liberal mind, I am not claiming you all think the same, but I do think there are usually certain common denominators.

An example of helpfulness, cyclops admitted he likes aspects of socialism or Marxism, along with some aspects of capitalism, and he also thinks animals should have as much rights as humans.


Actually, I didn't say the second part at all. I said that I do not believe humans are innately - which is to say, by dint of their very existence - superior to other creatures, and deserving of innate rights due to this.

I'm sure one of these days you'll learn to quote people correctly.

Quote:
I think this belief has its roots in the rejection of Judeo-Christian philosophy, wherein man has dominion over the earth and the animals.


You are correct, that I hold no truck with philosophies which are grounded in Mythology. such as the ones you subscribe to.

Cycloptichorn
FreeDuck
 
  7  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 09:15 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

Free Duck, I am going to make a request. Can you give us your philosophy of political systems, in some detail if you wish.

Well, I don't have much of a philosophy. My opinions about different issues have evolved over time, usually and hopefully based on facts. Sometimes I have no opinion. Sometimes I have an opinion but dont' care enough about the issue to argue it. That may be where you perceive inconsistency. I strongly believe that our written constitution and system of government was and is an ingenious way to preserve individual human liberty and justice as best as any structure can. So to the extent that I value human liberty and freedom I am liberal. That should hopefully answer your foundational beliefs question.

Quote:
The reason I am asking is that your posts have been a bit of an enigma to me, it seems they were somewhat inconsistently liberal or on the left, but of late have become more and more liberal or more left all the time.

That may be, but your perception is colored by your own political beliefs, don't you think? What you perceive to be liberal or left might really just be something counter to what you believe. Since you've already identified yourself with conservatism, and don't seem to qualify that (some people say they are fiscally conservative and socially liberal, for example) then you see disagreement with your opinions as necessarily un-conservative, or liberal, or socialist, or whatever label you seem to be pleased with at the time. I believe it simplifies debates for you to be able to label something or someone, because then you can argue against their identity instead of their ideas. And since their identity is so obviously counter to yours, you can never be uncomfortable attacking it.

When you say "I have found that to understand posts here by anyone, it helps immensely to know where you reside in terms of your foundational beliefs", what you are calling understanding is actually the opposite. You are asking me to provide you with a colored lens with which to view my posts, in order to make them easier on your eyes. I can't oblige.
okie
 
  0  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 09:42 am
@FreeDuck,
FreeDuck wrote:
That may be, but your perception is colored by your own political beliefs, don't you think? What you perceive to be liberal or left might really just be something counter to what you believe. Since you've already identified yourself with conservatism, and don't seem to qualify that (some people say they are fiscally conservative and socially liberal, for example) then you see disagreement with your opinions as necessarily un-conservative, or liberal, or socialist, or whatever label you seem to be pleased with at the time. I believe it simplifies debates for you to be able to label something or someone, because then you can argue against their identity instead of their ideas. And since their identity is so obviously counter to yours, you can never be uncomfortable attacking it.

I think all of us are colored by our political beliefs, or foundational beliefs. After some considerable time on this forum, I have concluded that our opinions may actually be founded upon our most basic of beliefs, call it religious beliefs, but whether it comes under that heading or not, even in the absence of religious belief we all still have foundational beliefs on which we view life. I think all of our opinions are outgrowths of that. Contrary to what you attempt to accuse, this is just common sense, it is not an attempt to be able to label people at all. Maybe you see your opinions being that of sort of a scatter approach based upon each and every issue, but I think you are kidding yourself if you think you come to any issue without any preconceived foundational tendencies, based upon your overall mindset or attitudes toward life and other people, and toward the world in general.

I find it interesting that liberals, such as you have just explained, shy away from ascribing to a particular philosophy, you instead try to claim you are totally unbiased and judge each issue on its merit, so that places you in the omnipotent position of claiming t0 be moderate, unbiased, and perfectly fair. I think you guys are kidding yourselves on that.
FreeDuck
 
  2  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 09:45 am
@okie,
okie wrote:

, but I think you are kidding yourself if you think you come to any issue without any preconceived foundational tendencies, based upon your overall mindset or attitudes toward life and other people, and toward the world in general.

I would never make such a claim.
Rockhead
 
  1  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 09:48 am
@okie,
life is not either or, okie.

it is not us or them...
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  -1  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 09:50 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

okie wrote:


An example of helpfulness, cyclops admitted he likes aspects of socialism or Marxism, along with some aspects of capitalism, and he also thinks animals should have as much rights as humans.


Actually, I didn't say the second part at all. I said that I do not believe humans are innately - which is to say, by dint of their very existence - superior to other creatures, and deserving of innate rights due to this.

I'm sure one of these days you'll learn to quote people correctly.

Quote:
I think this belief has its roots in the rejection of Judeo-Christian philosophy, wherein man has dominion over the earth and the animals.


You are correct, that I hold no truck with philosophies which are grounded in Mythology. such as the ones you subscribe to.

Cycloptichorn

Please explain that if humans are not innately superior to animals, then how come we should have more rights? I killed some moquitos yesterday, and a wasp or two. Am I now a criminal? If those creatures were just as important as humans, then does that mean that you could just as soon kill a human as a wasp? I think you need to re-examine the basic beliefs that you claim to have, and examine the logic of it, cyclops.
okie
 
  0  
Mon 28 Sep, 2009 09:57 am
@FreeDuck,
FreeDuck wrote:

okie wrote:

, but I think you are kidding yourself if you think you come to any issue without any preconceived foundational tendencies, based upon your overall mindset or attitudes toward life and other people, and toward the world in general.

I would never make such a claim.

Then how come you don't want to own up to what you are at your core. Do you believe in socialism, communism, capitalism, free markets, rights of individuals over government or vice versa, or what do you believe? Or do you know? In order to approach any question, surely you know that you must approach the question with some principles in mind. For example, health care, do you staunchly believe that government can and will manage health care better than individuals. If so, do you also believe government could better choose your house, or your car? Just how much should government do for us, and why? I think the confusion over some of these issues comes from a lack of clarity about basic principles, or a failure to appropriately apply those principles or uphold those principles in a consistent fashion from issue to issue.
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1427
Copyright © 2023 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.23 seconds on 02/08/2023 at 08:23:15