 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck...
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 11 - 11:35 PM Well, Ol-ster, then if you think the only way to bring sanity into the equation is to boycott their advertisers the guess again... Whatever gas medication they are sellin' on these shows don't really give a rat's ass if Ol-ster don't buy Gas-X... To them??? It's like, who is O-ster??? Hey, gang!!! Profits are up again this month so let's party..." This ain't about normal people here, Ol-ster... This is about folks who lookin' for a fight... And... ...they are armed to the teeth... I know these boys... I've had to live with 'um for the last 26 years of my life an' they is some messed up people... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bill D Date: 29 Jan 11 - 11:36 PM By the way... I have a morbid fascination with what MAKES people become liberalish or conservatish...... how can we look at the same data and go such divergent ways? oh...and 100 |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bill D Date: 29 Jan 11 - 11:36 PM ooops... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bobert Date: 29 Jan 11 - 11:41 PM Liked the less silly post, Bill... And fir the record??? If ya ever wanted to hear some well thought out reasoning, ya can purdy much count on what ever Bill says if I ain't around to say it first... ****grin**** B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 08:12 AM what MAKES people become liberalish or conservatish Two basic conflicting desires in the primate mind, Bill: the desire to live your own life the way you want to, and the desire to make other people live their lives the way you want them to. The former is the individualist instinct, and expresses itself in the politics of the right, and the latter is the collectivist instinct, and expresses itself in the politics of the left. The conflict between those two desires is comprised in the dynamic of all primate societies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: GUEST,TIA Date: 30 Jan 11 - 08:29 AM "the desire to make other people live their lives the way you want them to" is epitomized by the anti-choice policies, anti-gay marriage policies, and "America is a Christian nation - love it or leave it" rhetoric, etc. *of the Right* So what the heck are you talking about? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: GUEST,TIA Date: 30 Jan 11 - 08:30 AM Oh yeah, and "you are either with us or with the Muslim terrorists". Yup, no coercion there. Oops sorry. That was sarcasm. |
|
Subject: Whittle on blaming conservatives and the Tea Party From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 09:08 AM Since you're interested in philosophy and psychology, Bill… Someone asked Bill Whittle whether the left was ever going to give up blaming conservatives and the Tea Party movement for violence in our culture. This is what he said. No, they're not going to give up. This is very clear--it's called prepping the battle space. The left's weapon is shaping the narrative. If you're going to run counter to the truth and common sense in so many areas you've got to have a consistent story and keep telling it. The Tea Party movement, as anyone who has ever attended a Tea Party rally can tell you, are the most decent, kind, gentle, normal people in the world, most of whom have never been to a political rally in their lives. So in order to destroy the Tea Party, you're going to first call them racist – well, that didn't really stick, so you're going to call them stupid – well, that didn't really stick… I know, we'll call them violent. So for the last two years, every time something goes wrong… A guy flies an airplane into a building: "He's a right-winger!" (Oops, no, turns out he's a left-winger.) A guy shoots at the White House: "He's a right-winger!" (No, turns out he's actually a left-winger.) A guy starts shooting in taking hostages at the Discovery Channel: "It's some some right-wing Tea Party nut!" (Whoops, no, turns out he's a left-wing radical environmentalist.) Someone tries to set off a car bomb in Times Square: "Probably a Tea Party nut angry at Obamacare!" (Uh, no, turns out he's an Islamist Jihadist.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bobert Date: 30 Jan 11 - 09:12 AM The problem, Ol-ster, is that no one here is talkin' about messin' with folks Bill of Rights... Face it, there are limitations on the 1st amendment... That is a given... The example that is most often given is that people do not have the "right" to endanger others by yelling "fire" in a crowded movie theater when there is no fire... People don't have the right to threaten one another with violence... Those are both crimes that society purdy much universally agrees with... I mean, all we are talkin' about here is accepting the fact that "speech" is a tool that can and has been used to whip people up into a lather and commit violence against other people... It really doesn't matter if it was Hitler using his words to get the brown-shirts to go out and terrorize Jews or the KKK using words to get a bunch of their supporters to go out and shoot into a crowd at an anti-Klan rally in Greensboro, NC in 1979 killing 5 innocent people... With rights come responsibility... That is the cornerstone of any civilized society... This isn't any more about trashing your Bill of Rights then sane gun safety... I mean, there is a reason we don't put loaded Glocks in the baby's crib for baby to play with... Sanity is all that the Rabbis are asking for... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: olddude Date: 30 Jan 11 - 09:20 AM One of the reasons I hate the media today. Everything from all sides is just so distorted that it makes me want to scream. I hear this stuff about the tea party movement. Although I do not agree with them in politics at all I have neighbors and friends that support them and what those people are saying it is hard to disagree with. Who doesn't want lower taxes and more jobs. Good people and bad people come in all walks of life, across all political parties, across all religions and non religions. Yet the media presents them as gun toting crazies, likewise Fox news will banter the term progressive around like it is a dirty word. Yet when one looks back at history, great things came out of the progressive movement, like new laws against child labor etc ... again that is now a term of hate that is passed around like a pot of coffee. Sooner or later, we need to wake up as a people and look for areas that bring together answers for complex problems or simply fail as a nation. To continue to embrace the hate that blasts back and forth on all sides is counter productive to America and labeling people via politics is a bad as labeling people by race .. I think anyway. The new media today embraces the hate messages because of its entertainment value. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Smedley Date: 30 Jan 11 - 09:27 AM Tia's points seem especially pertinent and it would be interesting to see a response from Taconicus (whose characterisation of left/right is so American......). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: olddude Date: 30 Jan 11 - 10:12 AM The behavior you describe is neither left or right, it is the actions of disturbed individuals committing criminal acts. It would be like taking a poll in a prison to determine the political views of each murderer. The conclusion , they are all right, or they are all left hence everyone from whatever side is a murderer. However, that is what the media does today. Makes great cover stories. Fact is, criminal behavior exists and did long before any political hate peddling. The difference today, we as a nation have dumbed down and actually believe that stuff. I think we are on the same page as how this stuff all occurs anymore in the media and is immediately labeled political. Hence we solve no problems, create animosity between good people and the rancor continues. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 10:19 AM Because, Tia, politics is a multi-axis matter. The division between left and right as it applies to politics generally refers to the degree of economic control by government over the people. What you're talking about is the morality or private behavior axis, i.e., how much control (and in what direction) government has over the personal activities of the people. Also, you're more familiar with the American divisions into what's loosely called conservative and liberal, but more accurately should perhaps be called traditionalist and utopian. In America, both traditionalists and utopians want collectivist control over individual freedoms. Libertarians prefer fewer controls on both axes, and generally favor individual freedom both in moral (personal activity) and economic areas. So in reality, both conservatives and social liberals have collectivist leanings in those areas. Many conservatives are moral traditionalists who would like people to conform to a certain version of morality in sexual matters. Many liberals are social utopians who would like people to conform to social utopian limits on speech. Luckily (I think), in America the First Amendment puts a check on both of them so we don't, as Canada does for example, have laws that criminalize the use of certain words or the expression of politically incorrect ideas, and we no longer criminalize various types of consensual sexual activity between adults. Accordingly, in America the big battle right now is in the area of economic control, which is not restrained by the First Amendment. If you want to talk about the moral/personal activity axis of collectivist control over individuals, you should start a different thread because it's really a different issue entirely, although once again, briefly answering your original question, it does reflect that basic conflict between wanting freedom for oneself and wanting to control others. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bobert Date: 30 Jan 11 - 10:35 AM What has happened, Tac, is that we have had 30 years of allowing thr free markets to police themselves and all it has done is create a bunch of bad cops and unprecedented corporate corruption and a massive redistribution of income away from the working class to the monied class... Same things that we are seeing today in Egypt could easily happen here in the US... There is always a breaking point... BTW, also during the last 30 years of conservative rule (not governance) the US has dropped in every good category and jumped up in the bad ones... This is what the right has done... Not the left... The left hardly gets any microphone time... The media is owned by the corporate right and it pushes it's story at US 24/7... Heck with economic control... Lets just level the playing field... Bill has spoken about "Fairness Doctrine" in the media... We haven't seen that since the 70s... That's all these Rabbis are saying... We do need balance and fairness... It's too bad that tyhe left has to scrape and scrounge and pool their money to be able to buy one friggin' ad in a newspaper in order to get a point across when the right has unlimited access... Bring back the Fairness Doctrine and I think things will work out because then people will have more information before forming opinions and making choices... B~ |
|
Subject: Starting new thread in the BS/Non-Music forum area From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 10:39 AM An And incidentally, I have no idea how to start a new thread in the BS/Non-Music forum area. Is that a division that's made by the Moderators? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 10:46 AM That ("it's because of unrestrained free enterprise") is the Democrat party line Bobert is parroting above. Actually, for the last 30 years we've had more and more government control of corporations and economic matters, corporatist government meddling, which those on the other side would say is the cause (along with massive government spending) of the current economic problems. But that's an entirely different issue belonging in a different thread, as is the argument about the "Fairness Doctrine" and similar proposals for utopian control over speech. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bobert Date: 30 Jan 11 - 11:10 AM We don't have "free enterprise, Tac... We have a socialistic system that has been devised to let the Fat Cats win 'um all... There has to be a level playing field to have "free enterprise"... What we have are cooked books and cooked laws... Nuthin' free about that... BTW, go to the top and click on "start new thread" then you'll have some options on the left to choose from... One will be "BS"... Chick on it an' you'll be rockin' n' rolling in the Mudpit... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: olddude Date: 30 Jan 11 - 12:01 PM Actually since the dust bowl we had laws to regulate the financial sector and they worked for 3/4 of a century. Right before the collapse of the banks this time the SEC was watered down to the point where their lawyers were going to kinkos to use the copy machine because they didn't have a working one in the DC office (I read that post from one of the attorneys working for the SEC) Their budget was axed. There was this thought that banks could regulate themselves and learned from past mistakes .. well that was a trillion dollar plus gamble for the taxpayer that cost us all. That coupled with two expensive wars and we are now in the situation we are in. It is not really about new laws, it is about enforcement of what we had for 3/4 of a century .. when the government choose to ignore what worked, then we all had to pay the price or watch the dust bowl lines again occur. Mis-management by all parties, gov and private sector |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: olddude Date: 30 Jan 11 - 12:05 PM We never learned a thing from the founding fathers: "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered...I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." Thomas Jefferson |
|
Subject: Economics and the Mudpit From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 12:06 PM We don't have "free enterprise, Tac... We have a socialistic system that has been devised to let the Fat Cats win 'um all... There has to be a level playing field to have "free enterprise"... What we have are cooked books and cooked laws... Nuthin' free about that... I can't believe we agree about something, Bobert. It's not exactly socialistic, but it's a kind of socialistic economics just as fascism is a form of socialism. It's been called corporatism, and it's the form used by the fascist governments of the 1930s, and favored by the Obama administration and the Democrat party today. In a corporatist system, corporations are controlled by the state "for the good of the people." The government gains control, which is what statists want, and the corporations gain government monopolies and protection both monopolistic and financial (bailouts, etc.) Small businesses cannot compete because of all the special deals granted the corporations and all of the regulations imposed on small business, and the economy (and therefore the people) suffer. Free enterprise is what made the American economy great, and we have not had free enterprise for a long time. Whenever government gets into bed with business, just as when government gets into bed with religion, at least one of them always ends up raping the other. BTW, go to the top and click on "start new thread" then you'll have some options on the left to choose from... One will be "BS"... Chick on it an' you'll be rockin' n' rolling in the Mudpit.... Thanks. "Mudpit" is an appropriate name for this area, I suppose. |
|
Subject: Spurious quotations From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 12:24 PM Be careful about lifting quotes from the Internet, Olddude. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their Fathers conquered.That has not been found anywhere in Thomas Jefferson's writings. It has been identified as spurious, and indeed the words "inflation" and "deflation" as applied to the economy were not even invented until after Jefferson's lifetime. See Suzy Platt, ed., Respectfully Quoted: A Dictionary of Quotations Requested from the Congressional Research Service (Washington D.C.: Library of Congress, 1989; Bartleby.com, 2003). I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.That's a paraphrase of a statement Jefferson made in a letter to John Taylor in 1816. Here's the full sentence: "And I sincerely believe, with you, that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies; and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale." - Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, Monticello, 28 May 1816. Ford 11:533. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.This a misquotation of a comment by Jefferson to John Wayles Eppes. What he actually said was, "Bank-paper must be suppressed, and the circulating medium must be restored to the nation to whom it belongs." - Thomas Jefferson to John Wayles Eppes, Monticello, 24 June 1813. Ford 11:30. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Ebbie Date: 30 Jan 11 - 12:29 PM "... have a morbid fascination with what MAKES people become liberalish or conservatish...... how can we look at the same data and go such divergent ways?" Bill D "...the desire to live your own life the way you want to, and the desire to make other people live their lives the way you want them to. The former is the individualist instinct, and expresses itself in the politics of the right, and the latter is the collectivist instinct, and expresses itself in the politics of the left." Tacon "...the desire to make other people live their lives the way you want them to" is epitomized by the anti-choice policies, anti-gay marriage policies, and "America is a Christian nation - love it or leave it" rhetoric, etc. *of the Right* Tia I begin to have a glimmer of understanding as to why USian liberals and conservatives share little common ground. Instead of travelling along parallel ways we start back to back and go opposite directions. Kind of like dueling. Tac's reasoning made me sputter; it is so counter to the facts as I perceive them. Tia has it exactly right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: olddude Date: 30 Jan 11 - 12:44 PM That exact quote comes from the Jefferson Monticello website. monticello |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 12:46 PM Perhaps you should consider reading further, and with an open mind, rather than stopping as soon as you read something that is counter to what you already believe. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 12:46 PM (That was directed to Ebbie.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 12:50 PM That exact quote comes from the Jefferson Monticello website. I'm sure it was, but you neglected to look further down the page, where they explained which portions of the quotation are spurious and which portions derive from what Jefferson actually wrote. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: olddude Date: 30 Jan 11 - 12:52 PM I see it thanks |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 12:55 PM @olddude: You're welcome. :-) It comes from a section of the Monticello website entitled "spurious quotations." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Jack the Sailor Date: 30 Jan 11 - 01:17 PM Calling Obama Facist is cheap, Tea Party, ignorant shite. Its the Republican/Fox News/"Conservative talk radio/Tea Party tactic of constantly throwing untrue turd balls because "winning" is more important than reason or truth. Tea Party nut jobs can say that to each other, but outside that circle you just make yourself look foolish. I think that accusing the Obama Administration of Corporatism and Fascism with out pointing out that your average Republican administration is much father down that road is either dishonest or ignorant. A simple example would be the treatment of Big Oil. The Bush Administration has secret meetings and gives them every thing they want. The Obama administration insists that BP clean up after itself and President Obama is trying to cut their tax breaks. Which the Republican Congress will not allow. Obama is working with the corporations and trying to reign in their excesses. The Republicans and Tea Party are the Corporations cheerleaders and whores. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: John on the Sunset Coast Date: 30 Jan 11 - 01:24 PM There is a gold investment company which uses that quotation (almost in its entirety, I think) to promote its wares in radio commercials. Maybe his gold is spurious, too. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bill D Date: 30 Jan 11 - 01:26 PM Taconicus... I must respectfully dispute some aspects of your analysis: "Two basic conflicting desires in the primate mind, Bill: the desire to live your own life the way you want to, and the desire to make other people live their lives the way you want them to. The former is the individualist instinct, and expresses itself in the politics of the right, and the latter is the collectivist instinct, and expresses itself in the politics of the left" Basically, this is not an 'either-or' division, nor is an exhaustive LIST of the various categories in which humans operate. (I'm not sure one is possible, though we can narrow it for purposes of debate.) Neither one is limited to left or right politics, and in particular, the 2nd concept.."...the desire to make other people live their lives the way you want them to.".. is certainly NOT specific to the left. I have thought about this quite a bit, and 'usually' break it down into 2 sub-categories.. **the desire to have people think like you want, and the desire to make people act/behave like you want, whether they think like you or not.** On the left, folks certainly hope that 'they' can be taught to 'think like us'... but there is a very strong drive on the RIGHT to demand adherence to a 'standard of behavior', expressed in attempts to force religious doctrines, such as 'public prayer' and Biblical references in public places (money, Pledge of Allegiance, 10 Commandments monuments..etc.). This is an attempt to instill the definition of this as a *Christian Nation* into everyday parlance, despite what the Constitution says, and no matter who is made uncomfortable by it. (I can cite many personal examples, and you can read about it almost weekly). There are other examples involving gun laws, states rights, tax policy..etc, that look/sound like expressions of the desire for "personal freedom" on the surface, but when unpacked indicate a desire to **impose** personal & political attitudes on others. This assertion I make requires quite a lot of explication to adequately defend/explain, because it involves much linguistic analysis and references to philosophic "informal fallacies" Let's see if I can express it with an example: When conservative politics says: "We want to reduce or eliminate excessive regulation and promote 'free market enterprise' and 'individual initiative'"., this often translates into "We want businesses to be able to make whatever they wish, using whatever ingredients they care to, charge whatever they want, advertise without supervision, pay whatever wages they care to, be free of environmental restrictions and do whatever necessary to eliminate competition!" Of course they don't SAY such things in clear language, but that's what lobbyists are paid to strive for. Thus, I feel that part 2 above.."**...the desire to make people act/behave like you want, whether they think like you or not.** is the rights way of saying they wish to IMPOSE on society their 'freedom' to do whatever they care to. How does this attitude differ from what the left tries to do? Well, think of it this way: If the 'left' prevailed and the division between church & state were really clearly expressed and maintained, conservative Christians could still go to church and worship as they please, raise their children as they wish, and pray to God **silently**, whether in school, before meetings...or at football games. If the 'right' prevailed, everyone else would be forced to endure public prayer at those events no matter what their personal religion or lack of it. The right tries to frame the issue as "attempts to restrict their freedom", when the guiding principle should be: "Freedom OF religion necessarily involves freedom FROM religion for those who wish it." (I use religion because it is perhaps the easiest example to describe semi-briefly... business, states rights, guns, abortion..etc., take a lot more typing) So... I keep trying to ward off what seems to me to be over-simplified responses to these issues, and get at what gets hidden in slogans and talking points....no matter how honest and sincere. As Alfred North Whitehead said:"Strive for simplicity, but learn to mistrust it." (I don't dare start on Whittle's remark "The Tea Party movement, as anyone who has ever attended a Tea Party rally can tell you, are the most decent, kind, gentle, normal people in the world, ... right now. Counter-examples are numerous. Well, THAT shot my free time for awhile......I have tedious plumbing to do... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bill D Date: 30 Jan 11 - 01:28 PM (several interesting posts during the hour I was composing...maybe later) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Jack the Sailor Date: 30 Jan 11 - 01:34 PM >>Maybe his gold is spurious, too. << "his" gold probably is. At least the investment Vehicles offered probably are. The people running the ads are in business to make money and to pay for the ads. They are like Mr. Potter in "Its a Wonderful Life" profiting from the panic as the feed the panic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 01:37 PM Jack the Sailor wrote: Calling Obama Facist is cheap, Tea Party, ignorant shite. Don't get carried away, Jack, or make unwarranted projections. That's a major logical fallacy you're using to tar the Tea Party. Pigs and humans are both mammals; that doesn't mean humans are pigs. I hate cigarette smoking the same as Hitler did--that doesn't make me a Nazi. Likewise, saying that the fascists and the Obama administration (and other governments in history) had corporatist economic policies is not equating the Obama administration with fascism. When people think of the evil that the fascist governments of Germany and Italy committed, it's not their economic policies they're talking about. It's just a matter of historical economic history that the fascists used corporatism, which is a collectivity economic policy. Czarist Russia also used it to some extent. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Don Firth Date: 30 Jan 11 - 02:01 PM I'm not going to get involved in this muddle, but I will just say this: When I read Taconicus' posts, what I hear, loud and clear, is the voice of Ayn Rand. Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: GUEST,John on the Sunset Coast Date: 30 Jan 11 - 02:05 PM Me at 2:03 from a different browser. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Jack the Sailor Date: 30 Jan 11 - 02:10 PM >>Don't get carried away, Jack, or make unwarranted projections<< I wasn't carried away. It wasn't unwarranted. Obama isn't corporatist or Fascist. Even Bush was neither of those things even though he was much more in bed with the Corps. The implication is hyperbolic and foolish. You should know better. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 02:17 PM To Bill D: Okay, now we're dividing into a number of different issues, making discussion difficult. I agree, it's not an either/or division, or an exhaustive list. If it were one or the other, societies would be either anarchies or totalitarian states, whereas usually they are in-between. It's just two basic opposing instincts that interact in the dynamic of human society. You're wrong about "attempts to force religious doctrines," etc. It's quite the contrary. There are movements to change the law to ALLOW public prayer, but NO serious attempt to require it as a matter of law. There are people who want to ALLOW communities to display religious symbols like the Ten Commandments, memorial crosses, etc. on public property, but NO efforts to pass laws requiring their presence. And "we are a Christian nation" is an opinion, not something that there is any serious threat of being imposed on us since most people continue to at least say they support the First Amendment, and no popular political movement (with the possible exception of the Islamic Brotherhood) has as its goal the establishment of a state religion. But anyway, don't confuse what I said about "left" and "right" in our earlier conversation. I was talking about economic coercion only, not attempts to define morality, religion, etc. Look at what I wrote above to Tia, for example. With some very narrow exceptions, relating to a certain kind of libertarianism for instance, the current major political camps do not divide neatly into individual freedom versus collectivism in all areas of human or political life. However, they do more strongly align between the major parties in economic matters. So really, we need to discuss economic individualism/collectivism separately from individualism/collectivism in other areas, at least when discussing current politics. As you yourself indicate, neither "side" is limited to one or the other in all aspects of human society. I was talking about economic freedom. I don't mind talking about religious and sexual freedom, but that should be discussed separately. One final request: don't automatically assume that because I quote somebody, I'm adopting everything he says. I think there's a lot in what Bill Whittle says, and good food for thought and discussion, but it was he, not I, who said it. I do agree with the main thrust of his argument however, that many on the left are using the "violence is caused by rhetoric from the right" to tar their political enemies, and there is no real justification for doing so. What they are doing is scapegoating, and any serious student of history should realize it. That's one of the reasons it's important to remember what happened during the Holocaust – so that we don't make the same mistakes, or allow ourselves to be fooled by the same types of propaganda techniques that led to one of the major nightmares of the last century. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 02:28 PM Don Firth wrote: When I read Taconicus' posts, what I hear, loud and clear, is the voice of Ayn Rand. Thanks for the compliment (intended or not), Don, but I don't hold with objectivism. I think compassion and charity, and helping others, is an important aspect of our humanity. I also don't like her attitude toward Robin Hood. I just don't think it's moral to enslave one group of people to help another group. My charity should come from my own wallet, not others'. In order for societies to exist, there must be a basic contract between government and its citizens that allows for taxation to provide for the common defense (against not only invasion from foreign powers but also against crimes of force and fraud from domestic sources), and to maintain the infrastructure, which includes the environment. But forced taxation for the purposes of redistribution of wealth strikes me as a form of slavery, and therefore immoral. And anyway it never achieves its purpose, just makes life more miserable for everyone except the middlemen and powerbrokers who legislate and administer it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Jack the Sailor Date: 30 Jan 11 - 03:03 PM >>But forced taxation for the purposes of redistribution of wealth strikes me as a form of slavery, and therefore immoral.<< That idea is beyond stupid. It is closed minded, willfully ignorant, antisocial, unpatriotic fantasy. He's the deal, all the money that you make that doesn't require the use of public facilities like ports and roads and institutions such as property laws and regulated and insured banks to make, keep and spend is yours to keep. The other 99.999% is subject to taxation by your lawfully elected governments. Taxation has nothing to do with morality. Taxation is politics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 03:12 PM That idea is beyond stupid. It is closed minded, willfully ignorant, antisocial, unpatriotic fantasy. In other words, you disagree with it but can't refute it, so shout it down and call me names instead. That speaks for itself; no need for me to comment further on it (as far as your postings are concerned). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Jack the Sailor Date: 30 Jan 11 - 03:23 PM No. I refuted it in that same post. But you, like anyone who holds that type of radical irrational idea, managed to filter that out. I'm tired of tossing pearls at you. Enjoy your ignorance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: olddude Date: 30 Jan 11 - 03:35 PM What is with the name calling. That is exactly the problem that the thread is about. Nobody can talk, as soon as someone disagrees it has to be name calling. Taconicus is trying to engage in a simple debate and discussion. I don't see him calling names .. you don't have to agree, you certainly are entitled to your difference in view ... but the name calling is not warranted. I have my view which come from a registered independent, we are the guys that really do swing the elections so I do like to hear everyone speak on issues. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bill D Date: 30 Jan 11 - 03:53 PM **running by to check in** I read this:"There are movements to change the law to ALLOW public prayer, but NO serious attempt to require it as a matter of law. "...etc., and it demonstrates my point(s). This is an example of equivocation. It plays with the very meaning of the words. **IF** people manage to attain the legal right to indulge in public prayer in the places I mention, it by definition imposes on others. That is, we already have a situation where NO ONE is required to have a prayer session, but the point is not to 'stack the deck' in favor of a religious group who wishes to promote their theology, no matter who objects. I have personally watched Jews (and a couple of atheists) go to the trouble of being late to a meeting (of a non-religious group) so they would not be subjected to exhortations to Jesus by the VERY religious 'management'. Having a law 'allowing' unrestricted public prayer **IS** an imposition, whether the prayer is required or not! Why? Because those who wish to have prayers at every conceivable event WILL do so. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 04:10 PM Bill D wrote: This is an example of equivocation. It plays with the very meaning of the words. No, it's not equivocation, and I won't accuse you of sophistry either. I don't disagree with you about whether it's preferable or not to have religious prayers at public events (although if you're fair you'll admit that the movement to allow prayers is asking for non-specific religion prayers, e.g., not one's specifying Christ, or Mohamed, etc. – just God. Not that that's necessarily any better, but you shouldn't use Jesus-prayers as an example for your argument). Anyway, it's not equivocation, because there is a difference between a law forbidding prayer at government-funded institutions, and a law requiring it. Personally, I like separation of state and religion – I don't even like getting religion mixed up with money by putting "in God we trust" on our currency and coins, and I don't think we should have inserted "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance, which was done in the 1950s as an anti-Communist measure. The Pledge should be applicable to all Americans, including athiests. But there is a difference between trying to pass a law requiring prayer, and trying to get rid of the law prohibiting it. A big difference. But this is a side-issue, isn't it? School prayer isn't really a big issue anymore, is it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bobert Date: 30 Jan 11 - 06:01 PM Hmmmmmm??? I go away fir a few hours and come back and am astounded by the shear volume of material that our new friend, Tac, has added to this thread... I mean, their are links to this and that and seems that most of it is anti-Obama stuff which leads me to wonder if we have the latest Repub plant that has been assigned to Mudcat... I mean, we've had 'um here... They could pump out reams and reams and stats and quotes and links with all the appropriate bells and whistles and, and, and... ...never quite make it up top... I'd like to think that I am wrong but having seen so many come and go I do have to wonder??? So, Tac... Maybe you'd like to tell us what brought you to a websirte that is about folk music??? But maybe not??? I mean, I have no right to ask but I am curious... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: John on the Sunset Coast Date: 30 Jan 11 - 06:04 PM "What is with the name calling. That is exactly the problem that the thread is about." Bravo and Amen, olddude. This has long been a problem on the 'Cat, intramural ad hominum attacks, as well as on public persons who are the object of our opprobrium. Confront ideas with ideas. Nobody takes bullys seriously. |
|
Subject: Am I now, or have I ever been...? From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 06:36 PM I ... am astounded by the shear volume of material that ... Tac has added ... [there] are links to this and that and seems that most of it is anti-Obama stuff ...What, do you just make this stuff up? I don't recall putting in any links to "anti-Obama stuff." In fact, few links at all. Aside from quoting one pundit that I thought was interesting when I heard him on Red Eye last night, everything I wrote pretty much came straight from my head. which leads me to wonder if we have the latest Repub plant that has been assigned to Mudcat...Are you for real? Call off the witchhunt, Bobbo. It's really lame. So, Tac... Maybe you'd like to tell us what brought you to a websirte that is about folk music???Sorry Bobbo, you can start the Inquisition without me. Why don't you click on my name and see whether or not the vast majority of posts I've made here over the PAST FOUR YEARS have been about folk music or not. Jeez... This must be what McCarthy-ism felt like. Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the Republican Party? *rolls eyes* |
|
Subject: the name game From: Taconicus Date: 30 Jan 11 - 06:38 PM Whoops, sorry for calling you Bobbo, Bobert. For some reason I thought that was your posting handle. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Rabbis Push FOX to Bust Beck... From: Bill D Date: 30 Jan 11 - 07:46 PM "..there is a difference between a law forbidding prayer at government-funded institutions, and a law requiring it." Of course there is... but that obvious fact ignores the distinction I made. The equivocation comes from not distinguishing between a law that allows such prayers and one which requires them. When permission is given, then action is Once more... **IF** the law allows public prayers at government-funded institutions, those fundamentalists who wish to have such prayers **will** see that prayers happen. Allowing, when there is pressure from such groups is essentially de facto ensuring that established religious observances -- almost always Christian, with Jesus being invoked, will occur. Since the law already permits and defends the right of students/persons to pray silently in any way they wish, any pressure to 'allow' public prayer or other religious ritual is superfluous and designed to promote and establish prayer as a regular and authorized routine. "School prayer isn't really a big issue anymore, is it?" Depends on what you mean by "anymore" and "big". Various schools, usually in the South, and especially in Texas, still do what they can to find loopholes and skirt the law. Not only that, but few courts or law enforcement agencies monitor such activities at woodworkers meeting where *I* have recently seen it. I am glad to see that you agree that separation of church & state should be observed, but I fear that you are not dealing with reality when asserting that ..."there is a difference between trying to pass a law requiring prayer, and trying to get rid of the law prohibiting it...". It just doesn't deal with what happens when there is no law 'prohibiting' it. (I work with wood, and know about endangered species. A few years ago, certain Mangroves along public waterways in Florida were being ruthlessly cut down as homeowners across the way wanted to "improve the view". A law was passed, forbidding cutting of Mangroves without a state permit. Well, after a few years people complained, saying that they 'just wanted a decent view, and those plants grew SO fast',...etc. So, the law was revised, 'permitting' reasonable trimming. Guess what happened? Homeowners interpreted the law to mean that THEY could decide what 'reasonable' trimming was, and again, they hacked the Mangroves mercilessly. The law had to be changed BACK to require permits for any trimming.) It's common human nature to wish to do what they wish... and laws have to be there to try to make the game vaguely fair. |
