Just wrong

[punkdrew]

WADR, Odeon, you don't live in the US and so you don't totally know how things are here. Since Bush took office, we've gone from being a reasonably strong country with a reasonably strong economy to a country scared of its own shadow and an economy shot through with holes. And I don't see any indication that Obama will change things for the better, at least not soon.  He's not willing to end the War on Drugs, or even legalize marijuana (which would help the economy immeasurably if sold legally and taxed); he hasn't said if he'll revoke the sunset provisions of the Patriot Act, and he seems to think government is the solution to the economy. A New New Deal will only prolong the current depression by taking more $ out of the hands of taxpayers and businessmen, which means the former will be unable to purchase more goods and services and the latter will have to cut jobs and put less money into R & D.

So, until I see more signs that Amerika is regaining its spirit, I'm going to march in the street and keep my powder dry. If that makes me mad, then throw me into the mental health system and fill me full of Thorazine. Won't change a damn thing.

I'm not saying you are mad. I'm saying Lit is. I didn't mean to offend you in any way, Wandrew, and apologise if I did.

Lit, however, is mad, and about the last person here I would trust with a weapon of any kind.

I didn't think you were calling me mad, Odeon. But it seems like every time Lit raises a point you either say "He's nuts" or "There's other ways" and then you don't explain yourself. Obviously I don't agree with Lit a lot of the time: his theories about Muslims are garbage and his admiration of Nazi Germany and its leaders is asinine. But I believe he IS right about the US turning into a police state, because I've seen and read about it with my own eyes.
I don't much like the idea of a violent revolution either, but I have never seen voting make significant changes. Lots of people opposed Iraq War II; that didn't stop it. Lots of people think pot should be legal; it isn't. Lots of Americans (and at least one brave Brit who died last week) thought Bush/Cheney should have been impeached and/or hauled before the World Court for crimes against humanity; the cowardly Democrat-led Congress took impeachment off the table, first thing. I've gotten tired of fighting for rights I should have had long ago. I've got a lot on my plate and don't have the time I used to have. So if it takes violence to convince these twits that we mean business, then so be it.

[punkdrew]

"To echo the late economist Jude Wanniski, there's the Mommy Party (Democrats) which wants to use government to take care of all our needs, and the Daddy Party (Republicans), which is more interested in beating up our neighbors and keeping us in line."--Steven Greenhut, senior editorial writer/columnist, Orange County Register

[punkdrew]

Interesting parallel here, from the wikipedia entry for BABYLON 5:

The Vorlons represent an authoritarian philosophy: you will do what we tell you to, because we tell you to do it. The Vorlon question, "Who are you?" focuses on identity as a catalyst for shaping personal goals; the intention is not to solicit a "correct" answer, but to "tear down the artifices we construct around ourselves until we're left facing ourselves, not our roles." The Shadows represent a philosophy of evolution through fire, of sowing the seeds of conflict in order to engender progress. The question the Shadows ask is "What do you want?" In contrast to the Vorlons, they place personal desire and ambition first, using it to shape identity, encouraging conflict between groups who choose to serve their own glory or profit.

[DirtDawg]

Interesting parallel here, from the wikipedia entry for BABYLON 5:

The Vorlons represent an authoritarian philosophy: you will do what we tell you to, because we tell you to do it. The Vorlon question, "Who are you?" focuses on identity as a catalyst for shaping personal goals; the intention is not to solicit a "correct" answer, but to "tear down the artifices we construct around ourselves until we're left facing ourselves, not our roles." The Shadows represent a philosophy of evolution through fire, of sowing the seeds of conflict in order to engender progress. The question the Shadows ask is "What do you want?" In contrast to the Vorlons, they place personal desire and ambition first, using it to shape identity, encouraging conflict between groups who choose to serve their own glory or profit.

My son is obsessed with B5. (I have it all on DVD) He is ten and I have had many conversations to this effect (none as eloquent as this articlist poster, but FUCK!!) and his perspective, from a child's eye view knocks me backward, sometimes.

One of his most commonly instigated discussions though, revolves around another confusion, "Why does the advanced race of Minbari still have three castes?" I have tried to explain how the equilateral triangle is the strongest unit of construction. He can not seem to conceive of a balance between the three forces, however. He is more wise than he appears.

[TheoK]

The cowardly French built their Eiffel Tower in triangels.

[odeon]

WADR, Odeon, you don't live in the US and so you don't totally know how things are here. Since Bush took office, we've gone from being a reasonably strong country with a reasonably strong economy to a country scared of its own shadow and an economy shot through with holes. And I don't see any indication that Obama will change things for the better, at least not soon.  He's not willing to end the War on Drugs, or even legalize marijuana (which would help the economy immeasurably if sold legally and taxed); he hasn't said if he'll revoke the sunset provisions of the Patriot Act, and he seems to think government is the solution to the economy. A New New Deal will only prolong the current depression by taking more $ out of the hands of taxpayers and businessmen, which means the former will be unable to purchase more goods and services and the latter will have to cut jobs and put less money into R & D.

So, until I see more signs that Amerika is regaining its spirit, I'm going to march in the street and keep my powder dry. If that makes me mad, then throw me into the mental health system and fill me full of Thorazine. Won't change a damn thing.

I'm not saying you are mad. I'm saying Lit is. I didn't mean to offend you in any way, Wandrew, and apologise if I did.

Lit, however, is mad, and about the last person here I would trust with a weapon of any kind.

I didn't think you were calling me mad, Odeon. But it seems like every time Lit raises a point you either say "He's nuts" or "There's other ways" and then you don't explain yourself. Obviously I don't agree with Lit a lot of the time: his theories about Muslims are garbage and his admiration of Nazi Germany and its leaders is asinine. But I believe he IS right about the US turning into a police state, because I've seen and read about it with my own eyes.
I don't much like the idea of a violent revolution either, but I have never seen voting make significant changes. Lots of people opposed Iraq War II; that didn't stop it. Lots of people think pot should be legal; it isn't. Lots of Americans (and at least one brave Brit who died last week) thought Bush/Cheney should have been impeached and/or hauled before the World Court for crimes against humanity; the cowardly Democrat-led Congress took impeachment off the table, first thing. I've gotten tired of fighting for rights I should have had long ago. I've got a lot on my plate and don't have the time I used to have. So if it takes violence to convince these twits that we mean business, then so be it.

I don't disagree with you and Lit--the US is more of a police state these days than it used to be. I suppose the Patriot Act is to blame for part of it but there is more.

See, I don't think that Lit is wrong about everything. Of course he isn't. But he doesn't stop there. His solution is always to shoot the police and anyone with any kind of power, and that's just mad.

[DirtDawg]

Have we passed up the likelihood that he is just making posts to tune us all up so we sing HIS song?

 



Surely NO educated man believes his bullshit.

[odeon]

Have we passed up the likelihood that he is just making posts to tune us all up so we sing HIS song?

 



Surely NO educated man believes his bullshit.

I wouldn't think so either.

[TheoK]

 

[punkdrew]

WADR, Odeon, you don't live in the US and so you don't totally know how things are here. Since Bush took office, we've gone from being a reasonably strong country with a reasonably strong economy to a country scared of its own shadow and an economy shot through with holes. And I don't see any indication that Obama will change things for the better, at least not soon.  He's not willing to end the War on Drugs, or even legalize marijuana (which would help the economy immeasurably if sold legally and taxed); he hasn't said if he'll revoke the sunset provisions of the Patriot Act, and he seems to think government is the solution to the economy. A New New Deal will only prolong the current depression by taking more $ out of the hands of taxpayers and businessmen, which means the former will be unable to purchase more goods and services and the latter will have to cut jobs and put less money into R & D.

So, until I see more signs that Amerika is regaining its spirit, I'm going to march in the street and keep my powder dry. If that makes me mad, then throw me into the mental health system and fill me full of Thorazine. Won't change a damn thing.

I'm not saying you are mad. I'm saying Lit is. I didn't mean to offend you in any way, Wandrew, and apologise if I did.

Lit, however, is mad, and about the last person here I would trust with a weapon of any kind.

I didn't think you were calling me mad, Odeon. But it seems like every time Lit raises a point you either say "He's nuts" or "There's other ways" and then you don't explain yourself. Obviously I don't agree with Lit a lot of the time: his theories about Muslims are garbage and his admiration of Nazi Germany and its leaders is asinine. But I believe he IS right about the US turning into a police state, because I've seen and read about it with my own eyes.
I don't much like the idea of a violent revolution either, but I have never seen voting make significant changes. Lots of people opposed Iraq War II; that didn't stop it. Lots of people think pot should be legal; it isn't. Lots of Americans (and at least one brave Brit who died last week) thought Bush/Cheney should have been impeached and/or hauled before the World Court for crimes against humanity; the cowardly Democrat-led Congress took impeachment off the table, first thing. I've gotten tired of fighting for rights I should have had long ago. I've got a lot on my plate and don't have the time I used to have. So if it takes violence to convince these twits that we mean business, then so be it.

I don't disagree with you and Lit--the US is more of a police state these days than it used to be. I suppose the Patriot Act is to blame for part of it but there is more.

See, I don't think that Lit is wrong about everything. Of course he isn't. But he doesn't stop there. His solution is always to shoot the police and anyone with any kind of power, and that's just mad.

Problem is, we're running out of alternatives. Cops in the US are running amok. There are literally hundreds of reports of them shooting dogs and most of the time the dogs in question were either running away or saying "ooh a new friend!" And even if the dogs were attacking, there are better ways to handle an attacking dog than to shoot it dead: mace, trank guns, etc. And there's hundreds of reports of innocent civilians being killed, and each time the public complains and the cops in question go back on duty after being briefly suspended with pay. Which just goes to show that, in this country, if you're a cop and you shoot a dog or a person, by and large you get off. If you're a civilian and you do the same, by and large you go to jail.

I agree that the Patriot Act is not the whole problem; a number of bills that preceded it--just as the Anti-Terrorism Act signed by Clinton--helped lay the groundwork for it. And like the Patriot Act, it was rushed through Congress before anyone had a chance to really read it. This whole thing really started with the War on Drugs, which opened the door for no-knock warrants, wiretaps, etc. As William S Burroughs said, "Drug laws are a pretext to extend police powers." So when Bush came along with the PA and the War on Some Terrorists, he had a nice solid foundation to build on--thanks in part, BTW, to "democratic" leaders like Johnson and Clinton, as well as Reagan and George I.

I REALLY hate to say this, but maybe if public officials had to fear physical injury as well as verbal wrath, they MIGHT act in a less fascist manner. It's easy to ignore letters, phone calls and e-mails; not so easy to ignore machine guns.

[TheoK]

Machine guns for the win! 

[punkdrew]

I REALLY, REALLY hope I'm wrong, BTW. I just don't see this democracy working very well, and no signs of improvement. So as Lincoln said, it comes down to alter or abolish.

[TheoK]

It won't improve, oy vey. 

[punkdrew]

Meantime, it's 4:20 where I am and boy would I love to be smoking a J rightnow....

[Parts]

I REALLY, REALLY hope I'm wrong, BTW. I just don't see this democracy working very well, and no signs of improvement. So as Lincoln said, it comes down to alter or abolish.

All we can do now is hope and prepare for the worst