Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

Shaun Barrett · 2004-11-20 02:50:45

Be careful, Gennaro!
You'll soon be accused of trolling if you don't toe the party line.

Gennaro · 2004-11-20 02:55:53

Yeah, I know... (thanks for telling me).

Palomar · 2004-11-20 06:48:52

Bill:
Check out my new sig. . .
--------------
Actually, we are the elite. . .
Blue States have a significantly higher level of education and per capita income than the Red States and out of every federal tax dollar collected much more than $1 is handed out to the Red States & much less is handed out to the Blue States.

*What's this? You've repeatedly asserted there is no "we vs they." Or does that only apply to West - Middle East issues?

Now you're promoting "we vs they" divisiveness here at home? Isn't that a contradiction?

We don't need this sort of divisiveness in this nation. It only hurts and further divides an already intolerably divided nation. United we stand, divided we fall -- remember? Will the persons whose candidate lost the election continue trying to rub it in with this "Blue vs Red States" divisiveness because they can't accept the election results? How absurd. And yet it'll be the persons most promoting "Blue vs Red States" now who, in 2008, will decry the divisiveness the most then.

C'mon.

--Cindy

BWhite · 2004-11-20 09:55:19

We can't simply judge everyone by the actions of a small minority of the people in "their" religious or ethnic group.
In some countries I believe it's not a matter of minorities but the majority. Is it a coincidence this can go on in the Islamic world of today without anyone seemingly noticing, while it causes outrage in the Christian world?
I've even read newspaper columns in the national press where the practice was defended or toned down by an immigrant journalist. Why?

Where are horrific Islamic practices at their worst?

In countries we deem "allies" (Pakistan, Saudi Arabia)

Where are horrific Islamic practices the least?

In the countries we invade. Go figure.

= = =

Our "ally" Pakistan condones gang rape of a sibling as punishment for a brother's crimes. But does Shaun suggest we renounce and sanction Pakistan?

NO!

Why? Because they have nukes.

Hypocrite!

BWhite · 2004-11-20 10:05:08

Bill:
Check out my new sig. . .
--------------
Actually, we are the elite. . .
Blue States have a significantly higher level of education and per capita income than the Red States and out of every federal tax dollar collected much more than $1 is handed out to the Red States & much less is handed out to the Blue States.
*What's this? You've repeatedly asserted there is no "we vs they." Or does that only apply to West - Middle East issues?
Now you're promoting "we vs they" divisiveness here at home? Isn't that a contradiction?
We don't need this sort of divisiveness in this nation. It only hurts and further divides an already intolerably divided nation. United we stand, divided we fall -- remember? Will the persons whose candidate lost the election continue trying to rub it in with this "Blue vs Red States" divisiveness because they can't accept the election results? How absurd. And yet it'll be the persons most promoting "Blue vs Red States" now who, in 2008, will decry the divisiveness the most then.
C'mon.
--Cindy

I have always met people halfway. Most Bushies won't do that.

Its "Thanks for that half, how about another half, now don't be confrontational."

Cindy, tell me you agree that the worst Islamic atrocities occur in the nations that are our so-called "allies" and that many fewer Islamic atrocities occur in the nations we invade OR show me where I am wrong and we can talk.

Palomar · 2004-11-20 10:11:55

*First off, I'm not a "Bushie."

Cindy, tell me you agree that the worst Islamic atrocities occur in the nations that are our so-called "allies" and that many fewer Islamic atrocities occur in the nations we invade OR show me where I am wrong and we can talk.

*...after you explain to me why you encourage and endorse "we vs they" as regards our nation, but oppose "we vs they" as concerns the U.S. and the Middle East.

--Cindy

BWhite · 2004-11-20 11:21:36

*First off, I'm not a "Bushie."
Cindy, tell me you agree that the worst Islamic atrocities occur in the nations that are our so-called "allies" and that many fewer Islamic atrocities occur in the nations we invade OR show me where I am wrong and we can talk.
*...after you explain to me why you encourage and endorse "we vs they" as regards our nation, but oppose "we vs they" as concerns the U.S. and the Middle East.
--Cindy

Because I am tired of being bashed by the Right (Rove, Limbaugh, Tom Delay, Rick Santorum) with "We v They" messages.

Turning "liberal' into a perjorative. My sympathy for dead and maimed Iraqi children being morphed into sympathy for "terror" after all, they are "lesser beings" mere collateral damage, too bad so sad.

So I grow weary and say fine. Lets fight "fire with fire"

Since the leadership of the Right seems so determined to vilify liberals , okay fine. To quote our President:

"BRING. . . IT. . . ON!" I'll fight.

= = =

In my heart of hearts, I know that in the end there is no "us vs them" anywhere, ever.

Jews, Muslims and Christians all pray to the same God Abraham prayed to.

Every human being, whether Unitarian or Rastafarian, Chinese or Czeck, Austrialian or Austrian, Nigerian or Nepalese is held in equal love by God.

Americans are not especially beloved by God. Loved? Yes. Especially loved? No.

Self esteem comes from knowing: "Ain't no one better than you AND you ain't better than anyone else."

The speech given by Barack Obama at the Democratic convention captures my philosophy on this exactly. But 50.05% of the voters rejected Obama's call for unity.

= = =

Therefore, "Bring It On!"

Cobra Commander · 2004-11-20 11:28:37

Since the leadership of the Right seems so determined to vilify liberals , okay fine. To quote our President:
"BRING. . . IT. . . ON!" I'll fight.

This door swings both ways, the Left does its share of villifying as well. It's just part of the political landscape.

The speech given by Barack Obama at the Democratic convention captures my philosophy on this exactly. But 50.05% of the voters rejected Obama's call for unity.

While we're being all divisive, I find this somewhat perplexing. It seems that whenever I hear people on the Left talking about "unity" they really mean "vote for us" with the implication that all the discord is the other side's fault. Utter excrement. We have no "Party of Unity", both sides have their own agendas and would prefer the other simply sat by silently and complied.

It wasn't Obama's call for unity that the voters rejected, it was the agenda of those standing with him.

Palomar · 2004-11-20 11:30:21

Jews, Muslims and Christians all pray to the same God Abraham prayed to.
Every human being, whether Unitarian or Rastafarian, Chinese or Czeck, Austrialian or Austrian, Nigerian or Nepalese is held in equal love by God.
Americans are not especially beloved by God. Loved? Yes. Especially loved? No.

*What's God got to do with this? Maybe there is no God (then the points would be moot).

Self esteem comes from knowing: "Ain't no one better than you AND you ain't better than anyone else."

*So you don't think Mother Theresa was a better person than Adolph Hitler? ???

Who needs Heaven and Hell then?

--Cindy

Palomar · 2004-11-20 11:40:42

*As for the Left and the Right: It's so much bullcrap, BOTH sides of it.

Like my sister says: Election years (local or otherwise) come and go, and very little changes. It's still pretty much "same-old, same-old."

I just cannot understand Absolute Loyalty to One Party. EITHER Party.

This Left vs Right issue is going completely insane in this nation. Who is whipping up the resentment and animosity? What is their motive? And who can best exploit it from the outside?

BOTH Left and Right have opinions and viewpoints worthy of consideration. I agree more with the Left on certain issues and likewise with the Right. But I can't understand "all (complete, total and absolute agreement) or nothing."

Common ground should be sought. Points of similarity should be recognized and developed.

It's just getting way out of hand, IMO: The Right/Left feeding frenzy reminds me of a bunch of schoolkids pummeling each other on the playground.

--Cindy

BWhite · 2004-11-20 12:09:58

This is where I stand:

Now let me be clear. We have real enemies in the world. These enemies must be found. They must be pursued and they must be defeated. John Kerry knows this. And just as Lieutenant Kerry did not hesitate to risk his life to protect the men who served with him in Vietnam, President Kerry will not hesitate one moment to use our military might to keep America safe and secure. John Kerry believes in America. And he knows it’s not enough for just some of us to prosper. For alongside our famous individualism, there’s another ingredient in the American saga.

A belief that we are connected as one people. If there’s a child on the south side of Chicago who can’t read, that matters to me, even if it’s not my child. If there’s a senior citizen somewhere who can’t pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it’s not my grandmother. If there’s an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It’s that fundamental belief—I am my brother’s keeper, I am my sisters’ keeper—that makes this country work. It’s what allows us to pursue our individual dreams, yet still come together as a single American family. “E pluribus unum.” Out of many, one.

Yet even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us, the spin masters and negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of anything goes. Well, I say to them tonight, there’s not a liberal America and a conservative America—there’s the United States of America. There’s not a black America and white America and Latino America and Asian America; there’s the United States of America. The pundits like to slice-and-dice our country into Red States and Blue States; Red States for Republicans, Blue States for Democrats. But I’ve got news for them, too. We worship an awesome God in the Blue States, and we don’t like federal agents poking around our libraries in the Red States. We coach Little League in the Blue States and have gay friends in the Red States. There are patriots who opposed the war in Iraq and patriots who supported it. We are one people, all of us pledging allegiance to the stars and stripes, all of us defending the United States of America.

Barack Obama, August 2004

= = =

On November 2, 2004 this vision for America lost the election.

BWhite · 2004-11-20 13:38:27

*First off, I'm not a "Bushie."
Cindy, tell me you agree that the worst Islamic atrocities occur in the nations that are our so-called "allies" and that many fewer Islamic atrocities occur in the nations we invade OR show me where I am wrong and we can talk.
*...after you explain to me why you encourage and endorse "we vs they" as regards our nation, but oppose "we vs they" as concerns the U.S. and the Middle East.
--Cindy

Your answer, please?

Palomar · 2004-11-20 13:48:47

*I don't know that your assertion (in the quote box) is true, Bill.

And sorry for the delay (not intentional; I've got an unusual amount of distractions in my work day today...and a headache [out too long with the telescope last night, which combined with 50+ hours on the computer this week...]).

--Cindy

BWhite · 2004-11-20 13:56:24

*I don't know that your assertion (in the quote box) is true, Bill.
And sorry for the delay (not intentional; I've got an unusual amount of distractions in my work day today...and a headache [out too long with the telescope last night, which combined with 50+ hours on the computer this week...]).
--Cindy

Thanks, I have my answer now.

By the way, did you ask Shaun for proof of his claims?

If an Islamic nation is defined as "our enemy" they are responsible for every horrific atrocity committed by any Muslim, anywhere. If they are our "ally" then we must demand high levels of proof before condemning that nation.

'nuff said.

Peace.

Palomar · 2004-11-20 14:13:18

By the way, did you ask Shaun for proof of his claims?

*Has Shaun been making claims? He has recently tried to point out (in a very reasonable manner) Arab media bias. I've noticed that is generally Shaun's approach: He speaks his mind, calls them like he sees them, is consistent and sincere, etc. I happen to think he's right about a lot of the issues. You may consider that as "making claims"...I don't; I consider his posts as expression of opinions.

If an Islamic nation is defined as "our enemy" they are responsible for every horrific atrocity committed by any Muslim, anywhere

*So Bill, are you signaling you believe we're in a war against Islam? That the U.S. has declared war on Islam? By the way, I don't agree with your statement. There are good Muslims and bad Muslims, just like every group of humans. The ones who commit atrocities are to be held accountable. Trouble is, most (or all?) of the Islamic terrorists aren't fighting under a nation's flag. We both know this. So you are speaking of Iraq. As I've mentioned many times I continue to question our having gone into Iraq to begin with.

If they are our "ally" then we must demand high levels of proof before condemning that nation.

*Yep. But again -- most of the Islamic terrorists aren't attacking from beneath a recognized flag nor within a nation's military uniform.

--Cindy

BWhite · 2004-11-20 14:28:59

*Has Shaun been making claims? He has recently tried to point out (in a very reasonable manner) Arab media bias.

Isn't that a claim?

On the specific point, FMG. Butchery of women. Such practices are more widespread in Islamic nations that are allegedly our allies than those that are allegedly our enemies.

Palomar · 2004-11-20 15:00:26

*Has Shaun been making claims? He has recently tried to point out (in a very reasonable manner) Arab media bias.
Isn't that a claim?

*IMO he was simply stating a fact which I myself could see -- even before he commented. Perhaps it is "a claim", though I suspect your definition of "a claim" here differs from mine.

Perhaps we could both consider taking a rest from political discussion. It's the weekend, what do you say?

--Cindy

BWhite · 2004-11-20 15:08:15

*Has Shaun been making claims? He has recently tried to point out (in a very reasonable manner) Arab media bias.
Isn't that a claim?
*IMO he was simply stating a fact which I myself could see -- even before he commented. Perhaps it is "a claim", though I suspect your definition of "a claim" here differs from mine.
Perhaps we could both consider taking a rest from political discussion. It's the weekend, what do you say?
--Cindy

Sure.

Is Arab media biased? Yup. Is the Pope Catholic?

But FOX is biased also. Is the Arab media "more" biased? Not so sure.

The BIG question we never get around to is how do we reach the "average Jane or Joe" Muslim who does NOT want a bin Laden al Qaeda caliphae and who also does not want to bow down to the United States of America.

= = =

I am done for today.

Peace.

Shaun Barrett · 2004-11-20 20:44:33

Peace to you, too, Bill.

Maybe what I've said about media bias is a 'claim', perhaps an 'assertion', or even an 'opinion'. What's the diff .. I said it and I hoped the meaning would be clear. Maybe I'm not all that good at expressing myself because I don't think I get the meaning across every time.
But Cindy is right that I am sincere in my 'claims' and there's no doubt in my mind that you, Bill, are sincere in yours.
As for proof of my claims, I confess that's difficult. I see a T.V. program and hear the way situations in Iraq are described, the way they're portrayed visually, and I form an opinion. I go into a coffee shop, drink coffee and read their newspaper, and notice the emphasis they place on different aspects of Iraq and the Palestinian question. I get a pretty good 'feel' for the way it's all being presented and I make judgments based on these presentations using standards of credibility I've built up over 49 years of living. I admit it's a subjective thing - I can't deny it.
In order to give you 'proof' of what I'm saying, I suppose I could send you a VHS tape of the news programs, with an annotation describing how I interpret what's being shown. Or I could tear pieces out of the newspaper and post them off to you, again with notes in the margin. But it isn't very practical to do any of this.
Bill, you often make comments of your own, based on information you've gathered, and don't always include 'proof'. That's O.K. We understand where you're coming from and accept that. And, even if we differ, we know you're telling it the way you see it.

Without wishing to rehash all this again, but realising you and DonPanic and Clark found my 'claims' to be unacceptable for various reasons, I will simply say I expressed my opinion that Arab media, and certainly much of the Australian media, are strongly disapproving of the invasion of Iraq and allow that feeling to come through very clearly in their work.
I even made a prediction. I suggested that we'll hear much more in coming weeks about that marine shooting a "defenceless" insurgent than we will about the ongoing and deliberate murders of Iraqi citizens by terrorist suicide bombers and the slaughter of blacks by Islamic forces in Darfur. The publicity will be relentless and the details will be given priority by many media outlets. So, in a very real way, I've left myself wide open to falsification of my hypothesis - a very scientific means of disproving what I 'claimed', even if I can't prove what I 'claimed'.

That's it, really. The rest is just details and rhetoric and differing opinions. And we'll soon find out if I'm talking right-wing cr*p because we'll be able to see for ourselves as the days go by. I stand ready to be shown that the media will treat day-to-day extremist Islamic atrocities around the world with the same zeal and attention to detail as they treat the marine-shoots-helpless-insurgent incident. And, when they do, I'll have no recourse but to withdraw my 'claim' and apologise for having wasted your time.
Is that fair enough?

O.K. So that's that, then.

========

Incidentally, I think that Barak Obama is looking good! I honestly loved that speech he gave - even more so if he wrote it himself. Stirring stuff; almost Kennedy-esque in its power.
I've heard he's a possible Presidential candidate for 2012 or maybe 2016 (?) and, unless somebody shoots him beforehand, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him in the Whitehouse (assuming I live that long! ).

America has a lot going for it and I'm optimistic about its underlying unity, its staying power, and its positive global role in the future.

I'm not going to argue that last point or produce 'proof'. It's just an opinion, O.K.? .. not a 'claim'.

Peace to you and yours.

Rxke · 2004-11-21 03:48:18

I even made a prediction. I suggested that we'll hear much more in coming weeks about that marine shooting a "defenceless" insurgent than we will about the ongoing and deliberate murders of Iraqi citizens by terrorist suicide bombers and the slaughter of blacks by Islamic forces in Darfur. The publicity will be relentless and the details will be given priority by many media outlets.

First of all: peace, brothers and sisters (note to self: ask adrian to add a hippie smiley )

Shaun, your predicition will come true, because of several aspects...

The soldier will very probably go on trial, so lots of stuff will be *easily* available to the press to make copy. They will sure take up on it. Interviews with his friends, family, background stories, the whole lot... For most of that they don't have to go to Iraq, so again: easily obtainable copy...
Contrastingly: killing hostages by those hooded men gives the press only one thing to make copy: a bad video... The killers you can't do a lot of coverage on, because they are anonymous...

And Darfour/ car bombings is being covered quite extensively on BBC, Belgian press... But Iraq stuff is 'hotter' for the press, so Darffour gets second plan... And the bombings... If you don't have footage that is different as the gazzilliont bombing, it won't get a lot of coverage. How many times can you show burning cars as breaking news? Cynical, but that's the way the press works. The news got to sell.

FWIW, my take on te video of the shooting of the wounded guy: the soldier might have just cracked under the pressure, sure looked like it, and background info, like him being shot in the face, the unit having lost a man because of a booby-trapped body...
But saying he probably thought the wounded might've been a risk (the hiding a pistol or grenade thing...) I call bullshit. If the soldier thought that, he wouldn't be 'leisurely' standing there, taking his time to shoot him, no, he would've taken cover behind a pillar or something.... I don't buy, sorry. The guy obviously did something wrong. Can you blame him? Hmmm... Harder. Maybe his superior or buddies should've seen this coming, sent him back from the frontline... Or maybe they should not allow camera's. I'm sure things like this happen in all conflicts. But now it got filmed and everybody goes OMG!!! And that's hypocrisy. Come on, you just *know* these things are bound to happen, in such situations. War ain't pretty.

Maybe the USA tries too hard to make it look pretty, but failing all the time. Admitting things like this happen in a war is essential in the 'decision-phase' of commiting to a war too. War is failure of diplomacy etc etc, and despite all the fancy international 'war-laws,' rape,murder,pillage,torture happens in every every every conflict. denying that is lying.

Rambling rambling...

BWhite · 2004-11-22 07:13:30

Peace, Shaun.

Are you familiar with this http://trekguide.com/padd/tos66.htm]episode from Star Trek? Its from the original series.

IMHO, bin Laden and al Qaeda are like the evil entity in that episode. They feed and grow on hate. Our occuption forces create bitterness and hate.

To prevail, we must talk to moderate Muslims and if there are no moderate Muslims - - a point I deny! - - bring on the nukes.

clark · 2004-11-22 07:23:18

18:23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?
18:24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty righteous that are therein?
18:25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?
18:26 And the LORD said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes.
18:27 And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the LORD, which am but dust and ashes:
18:28 Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous: wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five? And he said, If I find there forty and five, I will not destroy it.
18:29 And he spake unto him yet again, and said, Peradventure there shall be forty found there. And he said, I will not do it for forty's sake.
18:30 And he said unto him, Oh let not the LORD be angry, and I will speak: Peradventure there shall thirty be found there. And he said, I will not do it, if I find thirty there.
18:31 And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto the LORD: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for twenty's sake.
18:32 And he said, Oh let not the LORD be angry, and I will speak yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake.
18:33 And the LORD went his way, as soon as he had left communing with Abraham: and Abraham returned unto his place.

BWhite · 2004-11-22 07:32:49

Precisely. Even if there is but ONE moderate Muslim with whom we can talk. . .

Okay, the text says ten but the point is clear.

clark · 2004-11-22 07:36:46

Okay, the text says ten but the point is clear.

Hey Bill, you're R.C., aren't you supposed to take this literaly? Don't you go Protestant on me.

Shaun Barrett · 2004-11-22 08:16:50

Bill, I'd be surprised if there's an original episode of Star Trek out there that I haven't seen at least once!

Your quote: "Our occupation forces create bitterness and hate."
I'm very much looking forward to the day they all come home.

There must be millions of moderate Muslims - I hope.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#101 2004-11-20 02:50:45

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#102 2004-11-20 02:55:53

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#103 2004-11-20 06:48:52

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#104 2004-11-20 09:55:19

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#105 2004-11-20 10:05:08

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#106 2004-11-20 10:11:55

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#107 2004-11-20 11:21:36

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#108 2004-11-20 11:28:37

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#109 2004-11-20 11:30:21

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#110 2004-11-20 11:40:42

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#111 2004-11-20 12:09:58

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#112 2004-11-20 13:38:27

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#113 2004-11-20 13:48:47

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#114 2004-11-20 13:56:24

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#115 2004-11-20 14:13:18

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#116 2004-11-20 14:28:59

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#117 2004-11-20 15:00:26

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#118 2004-11-20 15:08:15

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#119 2004-11-20 20:44:33

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#120 2004-11-21 03:48:18

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#121 2004-11-22 07:13:30

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#122 2004-11-22 07:23:18

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#123 2004-11-22 07:32:49

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#124 2004-11-22 07:36:46

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

#125 2004-11-22 08:16:50

Re: Political Potpourri - ...anything political goes.

Board footer