Uechi-Ryu.com

Discussion Area
It is currently Fri Aug 29, 2014 4:06 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 220 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:52 pm
Posts: 1146
Location: Massachusetts
Jason Rees wrote:
and I really think the danger of Palin for Prez has passed.


I think so, too, but then again, I also thought Hillary for president was an absurd notion a couple of years before she was seriously challenging Obama for her party's nomination. Oops. Except for shedding a few dubious tears while campaigning for the NH primary, Hillary never did anything that made her look weak, and if she keeps it up, she might be in the running in 2016. I think 2012 could even be an Obama-Clinton ticket.

OTOH, it's gotten hard to see Palin as a leader, even setting aside her Bidenesque skills. Stepping down as governor of Alaska was the kiss of death. Nobody's talking about it now because it's old news, but if she runs for another office, let alone the presidency, she'll never live it down.

_________________
Mike


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:36 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:16 am
Posts: 2758
Location: Boston
Of course people hate Hillary BECAUSE she's tough, in part. They don't think she's got enough "mom" cred. This is part of how we view female workers in other government positions too. For example, female justices get labeled as aggressive or bitchy for doing things with a style that earns their male compatriots kudos for their take charge / leadership skills. And given the reaction (partly manufactured thru the fear machine and partly not) to government healthcare, it seems people will hate her till Christ returns for that too. You know, we could always just watch the healthcare system sink entirely then revoke medicare and medicaid and have doctors resume charity work the way they did before government programs, charging the rich out of pocket and the poor by chicken. But that's another thread.

_________________
--Ian


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 08, 2010 9:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:49 pm
Posts: 3519
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Quote:
Well, I think Islam is terrible, for one. Also totally false. And there are no excuses to be made for the terrorists, or the Taiban's manners, regardless of the political stress they've been under.

I never one said teh actions of teh terrorists or other assholes is morally justified. Just not 'hurr hurr, barbaric religion is why, thats it! Hurr hurr' especailly the highly decentralized nature of islam.
Problem is, especially after the afgan mission, the word 'taliban' has become very very loose. Your no longer dealing with a bunch of former theocratic rulers. Even when it was a theocracy, it was freaking bi-polar. As i said before, Nir Rosen wrote extensivily on this. What i am stating is no longer a fringe view either. Time magazene did a report on the different faces of the taliban. Some 'taliban' are often drug dealers, random warlords, or anyone who would have any reason to be pissed at NATO troops. INCLUDING but not exclusivly, religious extremists.

Also ask yourself this, what kind of place was afganistan in BEFORE the taliban came into power? Pre-taliban aftanistan was crappy as hell. The leftwing government that took control before it's overthrow in teh 1980's was highly secular, brought centralization, increased standard of living, outlawed burqas and bearts. It wasn't anti-religious, just highly secular but authoritarian(bad) But hey, dirty commies right? So overthrow, which wasn't so bad, because that was probably 1 time in the history of the afgan world, and to a lesster degree muslim world that was highly pro-american. Who knows what kind of government would come out had they stuck around. But for practical reasons well...they couldn't. So it decended into choas. Even insane government can often times be more acceptable than chaos. Thats how they got elected. Whats worse, they admitted their ignorance of islam, which is why they call themselves the 'talib'(students) yet still wanted to create an islamic government (Huh?) they were selling drugs to the west because tehy had the notion "hey, you can sell drugs to infidels, not muslims" but then they invited some Wahahabi scholars to get advice, and the scholar said "selling drugs and alchohol is strictly prohibited....to ANYONE!" Oh noes the talbian thought, now we are in a pickle. They don't ahve much to export. so they continued anyway. If anything, they were a bunch of dumb asses.

To bring clarrification to teh pro-american/anti-american arguement. Though it's obvious where teh radicals are in regards to opinions of the west, the rest of the muslmi world is actually disinterested or pro-american.
My mother told me that when she was growing up, all she knew of politics was that "America was the good guy, Russia teh bad guy"(pakistan was an american ally in the cold war)

Quote:
That'd be the big stuff. As for the world getting more radicalized, we hear stories like this every generation. There's always an increasing amount of conflict and natural disasters and whatever paving the way for the second coming or WW3 or some other conflagration. I'm unconvinced.

Not her point, she had a broader arguement. To make it more simple, ill put it like this: For a long time, the narrative of the world really was: Hey nazi's are bad. Hey, capitalism vs communism! Western europe vs eastern! And the waves hit all parts of the world, as your well aware. Everyone aligned themselves, to a lesser or greater degree to this conflict. The religious folk tended to be more 'pro-west', including the muslims. Secular folk were more pro-communist(Hitchens himself i think STILL holds attachments to communism, though certainly he isn't a communist anymore)
Communism collapsed. The capitalist/communist devide isn't something worth rallying for anymore. . Now with globalization, everyone wants a piece of identity and sense of collectivism in an increasingly globalized world, they think their cultures and identiy are threatened, or are dissatisfied with their current situation and look back to past glories. Such as Stalin getting popular again and the remilitarization of russia in memory of being a world power, islamic fundamentalism and thinking they can create anotehr islamic golden age, persian nationlists(often anti-islamic due to it's origins in arabia) who support a nuclear Iran out a desire for the return of the persian empire with less then friendly view of both the west and arab world. The rise of neo-colonialism. And i already talked about the hindu nationalists etc.
Im not talking about world war 3. If you think about it, todays wars are all done economically. Killling is done slowly. It looks worse when you have soldiers slaughtering people than having them starve to death by having the IMF put governments in debt, or by ecnomic sanctions. Depending on who ends up on top, we will see more americans starting to have empty stomachs like other nations across the sea. It's already happening. Obama or bush or McCain can't stop the inevitable. I hope to god or dawkins i can finish my education as quickly as possible and get good work experience before ##### really hits the fan and im deemed unhelpful for society and starve to death. Your both drs, you will always be in demand, your fine.
The world isn't evolving like neo-athiests say it is, there are worse things in the world than just religious thought. While focusssing on a bunch of ignorant dessert barbarians who occasional get lucky and pull off a 9/11, people forget about bigger threats, like how the food willb e ripped from their tables as china is becoming more powerful, aggressive, taking control over resoarces in africa. But thats less catchy then the headline "terrorist blow up bus!"

Quote:
And I really, really am not concerned about the rise of "militant atheism" which as far as I can tell is just dispensing with the customary polite neglect shown to goofy ideas when they are religious in origin (oh, I need to summon the elevator for you because it's Sabbath? Of course. Here you go.) but educate me if there are training camps springing up.

I actually agree with you. The masses are too busy watching american idol and masturbating to jenna jameson to really have this become a real movement. It's isolated to upper-middle class americans and europians who, as you said before, are not breeding nearly as quickly as poor uneducated europian/immigrant families. And people who are even AWARE of hitchens and harrris usually read books. Literacy is high, but book reading is on the decline, unless it's harry potter.
I may come off as incoherent, and spell bad, but i actually do read books, and am SOMEWHAT informed.
And to your credit, so are you.

The theat of militant athiest however is less military but more so in lending legitamacy to neo-colonialism. Is that out of the big names of neo-athiesm, sam harris and hitchens are very much neo-colonialists, about spreading the cultural superiority of the west through armies, as well as lending ideas to the rise of europian fascism. Hitchens is more restrained in supporting the rise of fascist parties, even condeming(afterall, he has friends in the middle eas and has visited) but still contributes to some of their ideas. Dawkins for sure is repulsed at the political ideas of his two brothers in ideology, and dennet seems to not comment on geo-politics as much. Even sam harris's objections to the war were more about how ineffective it is rather than a sense of wrong/right, while hitchens was a huge cheerleader of it all.
I have family in pakistan, i really don't want to see them becoming refugees because of some paranoid fear.
I wanted to discuss this more, but also, neo-athiesm seems to oddly fall into check with extreme nationalism. I remember reading dawkins saying how religion takes away loyalty toward country and queen. But isn't the concept of loyalty to country just as irrational as religious collectivism?
Quote:
Check out the complete Palinisms (and remember, they have a complete Bidenisms too!).

*"I think it's appalling and a violation of our freedom of the press."
—Speaking about the negative media coverage of Republican congressional candidate Vaughn Ward, Boise, Idaho, May 21, 2010

"Dr.Laura=even more powerful & effective w/out the shackles, so watch out Constitutional obstructionists. And b thankful 4 her voice,America!"
"Dr.Laura:don't retreat...reload! (Steps aside bc her 1st Amend.rights ceased 2exist thx 2activists trying 2silence"isn't American,not fair")"

I hear Dr. Laura isn't a dr of psychology or psychiatry. What is the Dr. Title from?


Last edited by AAAhmed46 on Mon Nov 08, 2010 11:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 08, 2010 9:57 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:49 pm
Posts: 3519
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Jason Rees wrote:
AAAhmed46 wrote:
There are conservatives far more capable and intellegent than sarah palin. David Frum would make a better face for the tea party than sarah palin. Atleast to those who know how to read. Infact, though he is respected, im surprised he isn't more well known or read(David Frum)

There are conservative woman with more brains than sarah palin. Ann coulter(blah spelling) may be a provateur(and again), but she has shown more brains in her satire than Sarah palin does in her serious political speech.

I bet this is politically motivated, but this guy agrees with me.


I'm really not sure how you got on this tangent... but more intelligent or capable than what? I don't know if you've noticed, but Sarah Palin seems to have a great deal of skill at selling her image. Is she an idealogue? Absolutely. A moron? Hardly.

Ann Coulter vs Sarah Palin: Ann Coulter has a law degree from the University of Michigan. Sarah Palin has a Journalism degree from I-forgot-where. Ann Coulter has been in the public sphere for at least a decade now (maybe 15 years?), and has alot of practice ripping into people. Sarah Palin has been a mayor and a governor. Two entirely different knowledge and skill sets. But Ann Coulter isn't stupid enough to run for office.

That's one thing I'm pretty sure I'll never do: run for office. Who needs their lives torn to shreds, and a guarantee that at least half your neighbors will hate your guts because of a stupid letter after your name?


I brought it up because fo the whole 'retard' thing becoming politically incorrect while it was used pretty much all the time beforehand.

I think palin DOES know how to sell her image, some of which she learned just by the whole beauty pageant thing, but also good PR people. Afterall, is lady gaga good at selling her image, or good at PICKING people who are good at selling her image?

Your right, Coulter isn't stupid enough to try and run for office, though i believe it or not, i actually think she has good ideas(especially if you can see through her rhetoric and obvious baiting) and would rather have an intellectual making decisions. (as you can tell, i have changed my view of Coulter since i last complained about her here)

Lets suppose palin didn't get lucky and had good P.r. people capitalize on that luck, lets suppose she really is THAT charismatic. There are still woman better able to lead the country through these hard times.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 08, 2010 10:49 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 17, 2000 6:01 am
Posts: 2813
Location: Massachusetts
IJ wrote:
You know, we could always just watch the healthcare system sink entirely then revoke medicare and medicaid and have doctors resume charity work the way they did before government programs, charging the rich out of pocket and the poor by chicken. But that's another thread.


You say it like it's a "bad" thing... :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 12:32 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2005 10:49 pm
Posts: 3519
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Jesus christ, i should seriously make some effort to take time writing my posts and edit it. I barely understand what i wrote, reading it all over.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 1:51 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:06 am
Posts: 1750
Location: USA
AAAhmed46 wrote:

I brought it up because fo the whole 'retard' thing becoming politically incorrect while it was used pretty much all the time beforehand.


No, it was pretty much taboo before then, as mental health interest groups pushed against it.

Quote:
I think palin DOES know how to sell her image, some of which she learned just by the whole beauty pageant thing, but also good PR people. Afterall, is lady gaga good at selling her image, or good at PICKING people who are good at selling her image?


Palin's been doing this since before she became the VP candidate. I'm more inclined to believe it's her, and not some staffer.

Quote:
Your right, Coulter isn't stupid enough to try and run for office, though i believe it or not, i actually think she has good ideas(especially if you can see through her rhetoric and obvious baiting) and would rather have an intellectual making decisions. (as you can tell, i have changed my view of Coulter since i last complained about her here)


Welcome to not underestimating your opponents.

Quote:
Lets suppose palin didn't get lucky and had good P.r. people capitalize on that luck, lets suppose she really is THAT charismatic. There are still woman better able to lead the country through these hard times.


Huh?

_________________
Life begins & ends cold, naked & covered in crap.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 8:31 am 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:06 am
Posts: 1750
Location: USA
mhosea wrote:
I think 2012 could even be an Obama-Clinton ticket.


Hillary has ruled out a 2012, or 2016 run. We'll see if she sticks to that.

mhosea wrote:
OTOH, it's gotten hard to see Palin as a leader, even setting aside her Bidenesque skills. Stepping down as governor of Alaska was the kiss of death. Nobody's talking about it now because it's old news, but if she runs for another office, let alone the presidency, she'll never live it down.


I understand WHY she stepped down. She was getting sued 12 ways till Sunday, with more potential lawsuits on the horizon. Alaska's loopholes in that area were going to drive her into bankruptcy. Try running for office under Chapter 7. Last I checked, it qualifies you for a Czar spot under Obama, but I don't think she's willing to go that route.

Yes, I think her opponents would have plenty to zap her with, should she choose to run for anything, anything at all. And the media would jump along for the ride, hoping to finish her off once and for all.

But everybody's got different standards for the other side. I sat in the middle and watched this election's craziness with new eyes. With all the spin going on within the Left and Right, I have to wonder at any chance for reason or sanity to sink in. It's already on for 2012, and both sides are screaming for blood.

It's disheartening enough to make me want to throw in with one side or the other (much more likely the Republicans) and do my damnedest to crush the other side out of existence, just for peace of mind. The middle is never respected, never listened to, but always claimed by the winning side as proof of their anointing. Enough, already. No, William Saletan, this was not a victory for Pelosi. :twisted:

Four, maybe 6 more years. Then I'll be free to let my voice be heard. Retirement: it's more than just fishing.

_________________
Life begins & ends cold, naked & covered in crap.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 4:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 17, 2000 6:01 am
Posts: 2813
Location: Massachusetts
Jason Rees wrote:
Four, maybe 6 more years. Then I'll be free to let my voice be heard. Retirement: it's more than just fishing.


yep... headin' that way myself. I'm leaving where I currently am at the end of the year. Have some things lined up for early next year, but we're definitely out of here and heading past Bill-Sensei on the way to warmer weather. Once things are sold here, we should be in good shape to spend a little part-time work on my part and cover the bills. Semi-retirement looks better and better.

BTW, I was once "laid-off" (supposedly for economic reasons) shortly after voicing a political opinion that (I didn't realize at the time) was contrary to a higher ranking co-worker who basically complained. They hit "hard economic times" less than two weeks later, asked me to "transition" things over the next few weeks and then... bye. I got the last laugh tho, cause they screwed up the project and it tanked them pretty bad. (And some people don't believe in God. Ha!) I was asked to come back and "fix" things, but had already landed other work.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 6:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2000 6:01 am
Posts: 1348
Location: Somerville, ma.
Jason Rees wrote:
I sat in the middle and watched this election's craziness with new eyes.


Just out of curiosity, how do you determine that you're in the middle? Most everybody thinks they're more average, more middle-of-the-road and more moderate than they really are. You look like you're on the right to me, but you'd probably just say that's because I'm on the right. It's a bit Einsteinian :)

_________________
- Justin Powell


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 7:05 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:06 am
Posts: 1750
Location: USA
Valkenar wrote:
Just out of curiosity, how do you determine that you're in the middle? Most everybody thinks they're more average, more middle-of-the-road and more moderate than they really are. You look like you're on the right to me, but you'd probably just say that's because I'm on the right. It's a bit Einsteinian :)


I didn't mean the national side of things. By no means am I in the middle of the road in national politics (how can anyone be?) I narrowed my focus and only followed the local elections, without a dog in the race, so-to-speak. I didn't vote, so I didn't feel a need to attack or defend any candidate. I listened to all three of them equally, and true-to-form, as politicians, they're all likeable people.

By the time there was only a month left to go, I had nicknames for the Senate candidates: Milly, Murky, and Mickey. If that gives you any idea what I thought of the three of them.

I didn't vote because I recently changed my residency to Alaska, but I still don't know the issues (and there are plenty of complicated issues up here) well enough to feel like I was making an informed decision.

_________________
Life begins & ends cold, naked & covered in crap.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 7:09 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 27, 2002 1:16 am
Posts: 2758
Location: Boston
Gosh I might think that Jason would consider you on the LEFT, but what do I know.

Ahmed, if you're worried about the mildly West promoting attitudes of four authors, you've got another thing coming. You think it was a neoatheist cult that launched our war in Iraq, for example? No, that was talks-to-baby-jesus GW Bush. The West's ideas ARE pretty darned nice, and that is the one reason by being true to your country (or at least it's ideals, which are real and measurable and produce results) is more sensible than a "religious collective" based on fantasies.

As for us starving as China flexes its muscles, huh? Here I thought we were the biggest food exporter in the world. And the Chinese are trying to restrain their growth. Food security is one of my last concerns--and I'm delighted that this is the case, having just finished "Nothing to Envy" about North Korea, which I suggest to everyone. It's an interesting atheist religion so there's even tie in to the thread. Religion you say? Well, true, they stamp out religion wherever they see it and tell everyone to submit to the collective. That's a bit of traditional asian philosophy there... but there is clearly a religious overtone to the cult, with Father and Son status to the Kim Il Sung (whose death actually shocked a lot of people who assumed he was larger than life) and Kim Jong Il, whose birth was supposed to have been heralded by the appearance of a star and double rainbows ("across the sky! so intense! what does this meaaaan?")

_________________
--Ian


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 09, 2010 9:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:52 pm
Posts: 1146
Location: Massachusetts
Jason Rees wrote:
I understand WHY she stepped down. She was getting sued 12 ways till Sunday, with more potential lawsuits on the horizon. Alaska's loopholes in that area were going to drive her into bankruptcy. Try running for office under Chapter 7. Last I checked, it qualifies you for a Czar spot under Obama, but I don't think she's willing to go that route.


I'm aware of that, but a few things were made clear:

1. She's weirder than many of her supporters thought. That resignation speech, which came as a surprise to everyone at the time, was a piece of work.
2. She has limited governing experience, and she won't be getting any more prior to any future presidential election.
3. She was not willing or able to solve whatever problems were at the root of all the lawsuits.

For VP I was willing to give her the benefit of the doubt when she was governor of Alaska with very high approval ratings, but at this point I don't really have any doubts left.

_________________
Mike


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 12:47 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:06 am
Posts: 1750
Location: USA
IJ wrote:
Gosh I might think that Jason would consider you on the LEFT, but what do I know.


To the left of what? Me? Possibly. There's room on both sides. I have extremely liberal friends, and extremely conservative friends. My mom is a die-hard Democrat, my dad a Rush Limbaugh conservative. I actually listen to both sides before coming to a conclusion, sometimes drawing ire from both.

Quote:
and Kim Jong Il, whose birth was supposed to have been heralded by the appearance of a star and double rainbows ("across the sky! so intense! what does this meaaaan?")


:lol: Some people at work have played that youtube video several times. That guy had to be high.

mhosea wrote:
I'm aware of that, but a few things were made clear:

1. She's weirder than many of her supporters thought. That resignation speech, which came as a surprise to everyone at the time, was a piece of work.
2. She has limited governing experience, and she won't be getting any more prior to any future presidential election.
3. She was not willing or able to solve whatever problems were at the root of all the lawsuits.

For VP I was willing to give her the benefit of the doubt when she was governor of Alaska with very high approval ratings, but at this point I don't really have any doubts left.


1. She's not 'wierd.' Everything she does has a purpose, though that purpose may not always be what the media expects. She does need to hire a real speechwriter. No, wierd was that woman who ran the 'I am not a witch' commercial. Sarah Palin isn't a polished politician. We don't usually see that at the VP/Presidential level of politics, that's all.

2. I don't think we can haul out the 'limited experience' as something to hang around peoples' necks anymore. Please. We have a comedian as a senator. We have a 1/2-term senator as president. Democrats put forth a mayor of a small town as candidate for Senator here. Minnesota's had a WWF wrestler and actor as a governor. California's had an actor for governor (no, not quite the same as Ronald Reagan, who came to the office of Governor with a stream of union and management experience). 'Experience' just doesn't seem to be a factor these days. But hey, I'm with you: I think it should be.

Which brings me to the possibility that after Palin's 15 minutes of fame have faded for well and good, she may turn around and run for the senate seat currently occupied by a Democrat. Give her two terms of that, and she may very well be a formidable (and acceptable) candidate for president.

The laws that gave the Left such broad strokes to use against the governor are still in place as far as I know. That said, if the Left or the Right use it in such bad form again, we can count on those laws being neutered. Sarah Palin was the target of a broad media-inspired attack. The liberal radio station, which broadcasts on 1080am, and the Alaska Dispatch, a lefty blog, were central to that. They were also central (hand-in-hand with the Anchorage Daily News) to the 24/7 Milly caricature.

_________________
Life begins & ends cold, naked & covered in crap.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:06 pm 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 11:06 am
Posts: 1750
Location: USA
Speaking of Palin, how's this for unexpected praise?



Quote:
According to the prepared text of remarks that she released to National Review online, Mrs. Palin also exhibited a more sophisticated knowledge of monetary policy than any major Republican this side of Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan.

_________________
Life begins & ends cold, naked & covered in crap.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 220 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group