Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - "Freedom" thread or something
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

"Freedom" thread or something

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 248249250251252 294>
Author
Message
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37019
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 01:46
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

^ Of course it is, it's just when Bush Jr. or Reagan did it I decided they were reckless warmongers.   When Clinton or Obama do it I decide they're using prudent force against a despotic regime.   What's that all about?
The major spin difference between them is that Bush Jr., Bush Snr. and Reagan engaged in conflicts intended to directly remove an incumbent regime that America didn't like  (Panama, Grenada, Iraq) whereas Clinton and Obama engaged in conflicts intended to indirectly remove an incumbent regime that America didn't like (Somalia, Yugoslavia, Lybia). And that is a politically demarcated distinction not only in interpretation but in intent - the goals are the same, the political spin used to justify and carry-out the action is different.
 
 
Originally posted by Equality 7-2521 Equality 7-2521 wrote:

That may be the purported intent of the strikes, but the effect will be what I described above. Especially in terms of blowback, the selective US punishment of chemical actions in the eyes of the area must be considered.
Absolutely.
 
 
Originally posted by King of Loss King of Loss wrote:

Let's just have a global world war sometime, ok?Tongue
6/10 for word-recognition, 0/10 for comprehension, Wink/10 for use of emoticon.
"You know what uranium is, right? Itís this thing called nuclear weapons. And other things. Like lots of things are done with uranium. Including some bad things. But nobody talks about that."
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 54966
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Atavachron Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 03:50
Originally posted by Dean Dean wrote:

Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

^ Of course it is, it's just when Bush Jr. or Reagan did it I decided they were reckless warmongers.   When Clinton or Obama do it I decide they're using prudent force against a despotic regime.   What's that all about?
The major spin difference between them is that Bush Jr., Bush Snr. and Reagan engaged in conflicts intended to directly remove an incumbent regime that America didn't like  (Panama, Grenada, Iraq) whereas Clinton and Obama engaged in conflicts intended to indirectly remove an incumbent regime that America didn't like (Somalia, Yugoslavia, Lybia). And that is a politically demarcated distinction not only in interpretation but in intent - the goals are the same, the political spin used to justify and carry-out the action is different.

Maybe, but that's not what it is.  I think it's that I believe Obama's judgment is superior to Bush's, so I assume his decisions are better, whether that's always true or not.

Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28044
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stonebeard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 04:09
^ Somewhat agreed.

I do not like Obama as a president, especially because he had such a vision as a candidate and he's just been wallowing in pragmatism for 5 years in his presidency now. And I suppose I'd take level headed pragmatism over whatever Bush was, but still, you get the feeling that we'll never get a visionary willing to stick with it anymore. There are serious problems in Washington: budgetary, espionage, war. And at least I thought when I voted for him (twice) that Obama would at least try to be a liberal. Now he's really just doing what he can to maintain the status quo, and please everybody. He tries to say all the right words, but in the end he really stands for nothing.

Pragmatism can be good, but you can tell our nation is straining very hard under conflicting ideals and where we need to go in the next century. We need leaders who can trailblaze and not just wallow in reactionary politics. That does involve reigning in our defense expenditure so we can focus of expeditions in technology and science so we can actually be #1 in something again besides amount spend on bombs and cruise missiles.

Obama the candidate was perfect for this. Obama the president is a pansy.
Back to Top
Dean View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout

Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37019
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dean Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 04:45
I think there is a huge difference between candidate as politician and politician as civil servant. The responsibility of office tends to take precident over any idealism - how well a candidate manages that transition and the balance between civil service and legislature is the measure of a leader.
"You know what uranium is, right? Itís this thing called nuclear weapons. And other things. Like lots of things are done with uranium. Including some bad things. But nobody talks about that."
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Eclectic Prog Team

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32255
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Epignosis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 06:35
Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:


Obama the candidate was perfect for this. Obama the president is a pansy.


You had four years of the latter.  Wink
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15713
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Equality 7-2521 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 06:49
Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:

^ Somewhat agreed.

I do not like Obama as a president, especially because he had such a vision as a candidate and he's just been wallowing in pragmatism for 5 years in his presidency now. And I suppose I'd take level headed pragmatism over whatever Bush was, but still, you get the feeling that we'll never get a visionary willing to stick with it anymore. There are serious problems in Washington: budgetary, espionage, war. And at least I thought when I voted for him (twice) that Obama would at least try to be a liberal. Now he's really just doing what he can to maintain the status quo, and please everybody. He tries to say all the right words, but in the end he really stands for nothing.

Pragmatism can be good, but you can tell our nation is straining very hard under conflicting ideals and where we need to go in the next century. We need leaders who can trailblaze and not just wallow in reactionary politics. That does involve reigning in our defense expenditure so we can focus of expeditions in technology and science so we can actually be #1 in something again besides amount spend on bombs and cruise missiles.

Obama the candidate was perfect for this. Obama the president is a pansy.


The issue is that candidates don't exist. You only see a meticulously planned, everywhere controlled, facsimile of a human being. It's as much to say the president from Independence Day is what the country needs.


"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
timothy leary View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 4925
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote timothy leary Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 10:25
What a candidate projects is usually exactly what they will not be
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Jersey, US
Status: Offline
Points: 34277
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JJLehto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 17:30
Pat makes a good point. Many, myself being one, were a little....let down (to be VERY polite) by President Obama over candidate obama, but he is right this often happens. I didn't go on the whole "omg obama will cure AIDS, global warming and all poverty!!" but I did expect a decently progressive leader.  
Hell, George Wubya was the "compassionate conservative" and dont use our army for nation building and etc
One can argue there was an outside force (9/11) but very obviously the whole Wubya turned neo con (even though most of them never were historically)
 
It's well known in political science (what the hell else do we do with our degrees?LOL) that politicians "run to the fringe" to please the party, then "run to the center" to please the populace/govern.
There's of course other outside factors, like the healthcare bill I blamed Obama for not pushing harder/wanting to work the GOP that obviously wouldn't waver but then later realized a few important politicians with major health industry in their pockets basically killed the original bill. He could've pushed still, but IDK what's a leader to do? When the system itself is so corrupt...
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Jersey, US
Status: Offline
Points: 34277
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JJLehto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 17:34
Said it before, say it again: researching more into the post keynesian mindset actually brings a bit more vailidity to the core of austrian theory IMO
 
 
 
 
He speaks of Hyman Minsky who, while de regulation and markets were partially to blame, also speaks of the "big government" (Treasury and Fed) "intervening in every crisis" which meant "lessons were never learned" and how "stability is destabilizing"    a la Greenspan finally beating the business cycle just led to a massive orgy of spending, confidence and irrational behavior. Without saying it, this implies Austrian theory is at least correct in it's foundation, that too much meddling can have disaterous results.
 
 
Shame they then advocate fairly radical ideas like slashing most to all welfare, government itself and etc
If there was a semi Austrian economist who was willing to moderate it could bring more life to the core, and most vital aspect, of the theory. Though sadly even the word "Austrian" leads to a barrage of fairly hateful attacks, so they've doomed themselves it appears LOLCry


Edited by JJLehto - September 05 2013 at 17:35
Back to Top
Epignosis View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Eclectic Prog Team

Joined: December 30 2007
Location: Raeford, NC
Status: Offline
Points: 32255
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Epignosis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 17:40
Originally posted by JJLehto JJLehto wrote:

Said it before, say it again: researching more into the post keynesian mindset actually brings a bit more vailidity to the core of austrian theory IMO
 
 
 
 
He speaks of Hyman Minsky who, while de regulation and markets were partially to blame, also speaks of the "big government" (Treasury and Fed) "intervening in every crisis" which meant "lessons were never learned" and how "stability is destabilizing"    a la Greenspan finally beating the business cycle just led to a massive orgy of spending, confidence and irrational behavior. Without saying it, this implies Austrian theory is at least correct in it's foundation, that too much meddling can have disaterous results.
 
 
Shame they then advocate fairly radical ideas like slashing most to all welfare, government itself and etc
If there was a semi Austrian economist who was willing to moderate it could bring more life to the core, and most vital aspect, of the theory. Though sadly even the word "Austrian" leads to a barrage of fairly hateful attacks, so they've doomed themselves it appears LOLCry


I hope you see the contradiction between your first and second paragraphs.
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Jersey, US
Status: Offline
Points: 34277
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JJLehto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 17:52

I can only assume it's the classic: We can't criticize "free markets" based off the not free markets we currently have.

Understood, and I get that which is why I like the idea of the Job Guarantee Smile do NOT tinker with the markets. Leave them be, and catch whoever falls out of it with a true safety net. Plus  all the other stuff I've talked about it before, but yeah you know I never got why the CB part of the theory HAD to be hand in hand with reducing all gov welfare, I saw them as seperate.
And I also know moderation is not how this camp usually operates but well, guess I never was totally libertarianLOL
 
BTW I love yall so much Im here, even though Im currently on vacation in California! ...And my white self can't take any more sun for the time beingEmbarrassed


Edited by JJLehto - September 05 2013 at 17:55
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Jersey, US
Status: Offline
Points: 34277
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JJLehto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 17:59
Speaking of which...when I was in Berkeley a few days ago, a hobo was pushing "wonderful Obama magnets" and two (liberal cliche CA looking) women walking in front of me scoffed, saying "Like I'd want one of those" and "war monger" and there were the hippie protests in SF. So some people at least aren't giving Bama a total free pass.
 
I know there can be differences in every conflict but just boggles my mind, its always "anti christ" to the GOP and not even a thought given, but total support, to Dems. I mean at least contemplate before making a decision. But nope, just blindly say "well Bama is doing this one so its fine I guess, bomb syria!"
Back to Top
thellama73 View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Eclectic Prog Team

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8363
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote thellama73 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 21:28


Edited by thellama73 - September 05 2013 at 21:36
Back to Top
CPicard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Lŗ, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10639
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CPicard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 21:31
Yep, Bachar Al Assad should have bombed an American embassy. 
Back to Top
JJLehto View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Jersey, US
Status: Offline
Points: 34277
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote JJLehto Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 05 2013 at 22:18
Originally posted by thellama73 thellama73 wrote:

 
 
mhm
 
For a bit extra:
'04 John Kerry runs on anti Iraq platform
Now saying if we dont attack Syria it'll feed extrimism
Even though US intervention always seems to feed extrimism itself
I just dont even know anymoreLOL
 
 
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28044
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote stonebeard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 06 2013 at 12:51
Originally posted by Epignosis Epignosis wrote:

Originally posted by stonebeard stonebeard wrote:


Obama the candidate was perfect for this. Obama the president is a pansy.


You had four years of the latter.  Wink


Obama's first term was dominated by the health care bill, which is definitely a mess, but there's less there for a liberal to find issue with than the mess his second term is looking like. And there was Libya, which, right or wrong, did not turn into another Iraq. Now we have the NSA and whistleblowing, both of which are affronts to any liberal-minded person out there. And, in the end, I'd still rather have Obama than Romney, which is what it comes down to.

Now that I remember, I voted for Barr in 2008.

Not saying I'm happy with my decision to vote for Obama in 2012, but I know he has potential to be a good president. He's just...not.

Bush on the other hand, could have never been a good president.
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15713
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Equality 7-2521 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 06 2013 at 13:09
Sure he could have if he went through with his platform. Though I'm not even sure what it means to could have been a good president.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
King of Loss View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: April 21 2005
Location: Watching You
Status: Offline
Points: 14578
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote King of Loss Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 06 2013 at 15:23
He kind of reminds me of a Tory,more than any US politician.

Zizou 1988-2006
Back to Top
manofmystery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2008
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4334
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote manofmystery Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 06 2013 at 19:21


By the way, the changes made to posting here suck

Edited by manofmystery - September 06 2013 at 19:23


Time always wins.
Back to Top
manofmystery View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2008
Location: PA, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4334
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote manofmystery Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 06 2013 at 19:23
As seen by the fact that I still can't get a simple video to post


Time always wins.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 248249250251252 294>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.171 seconds.