What's new
By:

Obama Government Shutdown?

heyhey said:
What do you have fishon on your ignore list? what did fish ever do to you that made you want to gloss over his posts. come on man!
Click to expand...

Didn't know fish needed my help putting you in your place. He did just fine.
 
LogGrad98 said:
Damn this app and the lack of liking and/or repping ability.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...


I hate it as well.
 
heyhey said:
The great value 1% milk is 1% milk!
Click to expand...

Seriously though, I like the great value better than meadow gold, viva, mtn dairy, western family, etc.

Maybe I should start a thread about milk.
 
heyhey said:
yeah well you are intentionally blind to the effect of $6 smokes. Smokes>milk
Give yer little brats water for ****s sake! Better yet go get one of their markers and drop that in a pitcher of water, tell em it's lemonade. When life gives you markers, make lemonade.
AC098689l.jpg

glass+lemonade+2.JPG
Click to expand...

Lol.
must spread the rep
 
fishonjazz said:
I would rather have someone else pay the other 5 for me than me pay it..... in other words: me paying 3 dollars for milk is better than me paying 6 or 8 dollars for milk.

Oh and the great value 1% milk is my favorite milk
Click to expand...

Damn straight. But I'm more of a 2% guy myself.
 
heyhey said:
Just because someone lived a long time ago does not make their theories invalid. Socrates had his debates in The Republic over 2000 years ago and I think the thoughts expressed therein about the role and design of a just government are still valid to consider today.
Click to expand...

Because Socrates knew what our society would look like today and was therefore able to predict exactly the issues we will be dealing with right now?
 
babe said:
They had common sense and basic honesty, and they were not a small elite. yes they were well-educated and knew some of the history of earlier experiments in better government. . . . which historically failed for one reason or another. Every society we know anything about has had some highs and lows.
Click to expand...

They were NOT a small elite? Could've fooled me. The first Continental Congress had 56 delegates, the subsequent ones had even fewer. There were 3-3.5 million people living in the USA in 1788, and 40,000 of them got to decide who would be the first president? Not a small elite?
 
JimLes said:
Because Socrates knew what our society would look like today and was therefore able to predict exactly the issues we will be dealing with right now?
Click to expand...

Is it possible that some principles are just, for lack of a better word, true? Maybe some principles and ideas hold true no matter what era they originate. In-door plumbing is a good idea, for the Romans and for us, right? Or should we bag it because there is no possible way the Romans could know what we would face today so their ideas are invalid. I guess beer would fit in this category as well. Sorry GF, no more beer. The way you are talking it sounds like you advocate ignoring the past and always recreating everything because tomorrow is going to be different from yesterday. Talk about faulty logic and a scary premise. I would put in a quote about being doomed to repeat the past, but the quote occurred in the past so it is invalid, right?
 
LogGrad98 said:
Is it possible that some principles are just, for lack of a better word, true? Maybe some principles and ideas hold true no matter what era they originate. In-door plumbing is a good idea, for the Romans and for us, right? Or should we bag it because there is no possible way the Romans could know what we would face today so their ideas are invalid. I guess beer would fit in this category as well. Sorry GF, no more beer. The way you are talking it sounds like you advocate ignoring the past and always recreating everything because tomorrow is going to be different from yesterday. Talk about faulty logic and a scary premise. I would put in a quote about being doomed to repeat the past, but the quote occurred in the past so it is invalid, right?
Click to expand...


Except the comparisons you are making are absolute apples to oranges. Comparing societal systems to beer and indoor plumbing? Really?
 
LogGrad98 said:
Is it possible that some principles are just, for lack of a better word, true? Maybe some principles and ideas hold true no matter what era they originate. In-door plumbing is a good idea, for the Romans and for us, right? Or should we bag it because there is no possible way the Romans could know what we would face today so their ideas are invalid. I guess beer would fit in this category as well. Sorry GF, no more beer. The way you are talking it sounds like you advocate ignoring the past and always recreating everything because tomorrow is going to be different from yesterday. Talk about faulty logic and a scary premise. I would put in a quote about being doomed to repeat the past, but the quote occurred in the past so it is invalid, right?
Click to expand...

Yes and no. Democracy takes work and diligence. The TP fundamentalists believe they can apply a pre-programmed formula to every vote based on idealized economic and religious principals, and the world will reach [their] utopic perfection if only the ignorant masses converted. That's quite a lazy, purposefully uninformed voting group, and the antithesis to the founding concepts of the republic. The most famous founding fathers were big on education; the TP is big on blasting education's "Ivory Tower" while, instead of honest learning, attempting re-write and selectively interpret history in a way that crams law decisions in to their quaint ideology.

If that's what you mean by true principals then no absolutely not.
 
JimLes said:
They were NOT a small elite? Could've fooled me. The first Continental Congress had 56 delegates, the subsequent ones had even fewer. There were 3-3.5 million people living in the USA in 1788, and 40,000 of them got to decide who would be the first president? Not a small elite?
Click to expand...

The Continental Congress consisted of representatives from the colonies, selected by state officials who held office in part because of popular sentiments, but principally because they stood for principles people respected better than the principles which the British overseers had applied. England or Great Britain's Parliament had not allowed any of the colonies to sent representatives, and had dictated laws governing the colonies.

The Queen of England, today, if she deigns to do so, may invalidate any measure enacted by any Commonwealth member, and will never face an "election". Similarly, officials of the UN will never face an election where you or I can vote to approve or disapprove their law, rules, programs, or objectives.

The input and power which came from the ordinary people in enacting and ratifying the US Constitution was much more broadly based than your government has ever been, to this date, and more broadly based than the UN ever will be.

It may be true that certain financial interests do have the ear of the Queen, and that she knows she can be outflanked if she steps out of line, but at least in polite terms she is still the Queen.
 
franklin said:
Yes and no. Democracy takes work and diligence. The TP fundamentalists believe they can apply a pre-programmed formula to every vote based on idealized economic and religious principals, and the world will reach [their] utopic perfection if only the ignorant masses converted. That's quite a lazy, purposefully uninformed voting group, and the antithesis to the founding concepts of the republic. The most famous founding fathers were big on education; the TP is big on blasting education's "Ivory Tower" while, instead of honest learning, attempting re-write and selectively interpret history in a way that crams law decisions in to their quaint ideology.

If that's what you mean by true principals then no absolutely not.
Click to expand...

Probably we could all use a rhetorical upgrade, so say at least the 2.0 version that our founding fathers were expert at using.

Of course people addressing the problems of their times do have a chance to make things better, but what you are doing and saying here is a step back into sheer demagogery, not a step up.
 
franklin said:
Yes and no. Democracy takes work and diligence. The TP fundamentalists believe they can apply a pre-programmed formula to every vote based on idealized economic and religious principals, and the world will reach [their] utopic perfection if only the ignorant masses converted. That's quite a lazy, purposefully uninformed voting group, and the antithesis to the founding concepts of the republic. The most famous founding fathers were big on education; the TP is big on blasting education's "Ivory Tower" while, instead of honest learning, attempting re-write and selectively interpret history in a way that crams law decisions in to their quaint ideology.

If that's what you mean by true principals then no absolutely not.
Click to expand...

<rhetorical critique>

"The Tea Party" is a vaguely defined entity with no official spokesman. Ron Paul may have been at least conceptually the beginning of it. Many democrats who reject some aspects of government deemed excessive or intrusive have come out for one idea or another that is rhetorically bagged and labeled as "Tea Party" by a disparaging mainstream media and some politicians who hold more favorable views to the present fashion and power of "government", but today the Republican mainstream has pretty much sidelined the "Tea Party" elements in their party, and are mostly in cahoots with the Dems on most of what our government is doing. . . . though most of their voter base clearly wants their party to do some push-back on things like Obamacare, and measures to curtail "excessive" spending. . . . hence the political posturing that is going on with the "government shutdown". It has got to last long enough that Republican voters will remember their representative or Senator "tried" to do "something". . . .

I just say there really is no meaningful "government shutdown", and nothing is actually going to be done. The media hype is all about controlling the rhetoric and posturing for the next election, and attempting to divert blame and actually to avoid taking any responsibility for the things people are unhappy about. . . . .

And, franklin, I know you're a smart guy who believes in monetary policy of a certain stripe. . .. and I know a lot of "tea party" folks are sorta lost in the woods and can't understand your actual ideas. . . . I just hate seeing you lump them all together with, say, communist or western-manipulated political activists who are working the Islamic community with inflammatory rhetoric.

"Tea Party" folks who do indeed want to restore more direct influence upon our government by actual citizens are talking about essential human liberties like freedom of speech, belief, religion, and economic choice. . . . in direct reaction to progressive encroachments upon our rights. . . . but, alas, many are still idiots, sorry to say.
 
dalamon said:
Except the comparisons you are making are absolute apples to oranges. Comparing societal systems to beer and indoor plumbing? Really?
Click to expand...

It is just as absurd as stating that nothing anyone thought about societal systems in the past has any bearing on today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top