x

Count me in as a cynic. I've seen waaayyy too much to buy into most of the propaganda out there. Want to break through the illusion?

If you are a reader, read authors like Ward Curchill, Noam Chomsky, Manning Marable, Ben Badikian, Orianna Falaci, Jose Ortega y Gasset, Paulo Friere, etc. If you want a quick read, try Chomsky's "What Uncle Sam Really Wants."

But don't fall for the overly lefty or paranoid crap, either. There's some great conservative writers out there, like Thomas Sowell, Dinesh D'Souza, and even PJ O'Rourke.

I've gotta say that the greatest thing about the US government was Thomas Jefferson. What a brilliant, creative visionary. The problem is that there's no shortage of sharks who twist his vision into the status quo, and call it "government."

The politicians voice a smokescreen policy. They care about what behaviors will get them elected, mostly. Every now and then you get a true "leader," but their primary agenda is never "us." Their agenda is the welfare state... The welfare state for the very wealthy.

And there ya have it.

Isn't it time for Kendricks to bomb another building or something?

Noam Chompsky is a worthless piece of shit, as are all intellectuals. He has never had a real job, never labored, never served his country in uniform. And he presumes to tell us how to live? Fuck him.
I value intellect. I do not value intellectuals.

OFF-TOPIC
Oh, yeah, the soldier thing. You aren't the first or the last person ever to be one, or to put your life on the line for this country. There really IS such a thing as "military intelligence." Some great INTELLECTUALS are in the military, by the way. You can thank them for saving YOUR ass. If you are gonna die at war, you might as well know what you are dying for. At least thats my THEORY. Next.

Dogster,

I thought I posted an answer last night. Drinking and posting do not mix.

IMHO what you said kind of neatly sums it up. Oh Jefferson was one of my favorites too for many reasons.

Oh and I have done my time in the military for what that's worth and who is Noam Chopsky.

I don't agree with a lot of what Chomsky says, but saying that "all intellectuals" are "worthless pieces of shit" is a hell of a leap. I feel like I am on the Planet of the Apes all of a sudden... "I am a simple soldier. As such, I see things simply."

Dazed, of course politicians don't care about what we think or feel, other than for one reason: Their handlers need to take opinion polls to know what kind of bullshit to sling at us in the professionally prepared speeches politicians read to us.

Kendricks,

I guess it's really an academic question.. My real question, I guess, is, is there anything we can do to improve things?

The middle class are getting their balls squeezed tighter and tighter each year. The rich are generaly getting richer and the poor,homeless and
hungry population is exploding.

Dazed & Innocent

The *only* way we will ever see any change is if people stop voting for the fucking Republocrats, and get a substantial number of third party or truly independent people in office. That, or violent revolution.

I doubt we will see either of these things in the near future.

Well, I think we can all make the world a better place through whoring. I plan to contribute to the greater good this afternoon. Yours in Hombre-hood. LOL

Ya know, I think that being an unrepentant intellectual is part of what is required to improve things. IMHO, one of the most toxic elements of our society is the pervasive anti-intellectual attitude. But if you aren't paying attention to what the intelligensia are saying (for better or worse), and if you are too apathetic or stupid to consider alternative views, then you are clinically diagnosable as a dumbass. This is not an opinion. This is simple fact. LOL

Thomas Jefferson (intellectual) had some great ideas about the link between an educated populace and the quality of government. So maybe some of the dudes who are over-identified with being soldiers should take the machine guns out of their asses...

1789. "Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government."

1810. "No one more sincerely wishes the spread of information among mankind than I do, and none has greater confidence in its effect towards supporting free and good government."

1816. "Enlighten the people generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like evil spirits at the dawn of day . . . . I believe it [human condition] susceptible of much improvement, and most of all, in matters of government and religion; and that the diffusion of knowledge among the people is to be the instrument by which it is effected."

1820. "I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people themselves; and if we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesom discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their discretion by education. This is the true corrective of abuses of constitutional power."

Of course, being educated and intellectual isn't enough. You have to have the guts and the heart and the strength to follow through and not tolerate governmental bullshit. That's why the peoples' right to bear arms (lots of them, with lots of destructive capability) is so important. Every now and then the people have to blast the living shit out of the bureaucratic power elite in order to keep the system calibrated. That's one way to change things, but that is different than a bunch of Hitler Youth dumbasses shootin' up the joint.

Well, so much for that. I obviously need to get laid. Can't wait to get off work...

God Bless America
Gob Bless the Zona Norte

Dogster, how do you respond to allegations that it was hypocritical of Jefferson to crusade against tyranny, while he was a slave owner?

Kendricks: Yeah, it was hypocritical. And it is kind've remarkable that the genetic testing leaves virtually no doubt. You could take the hypocricy a step further and include Jefferson's complicity in the native American genocide as another example. Nobody's perfect. But at least he wasn't unfaithful to his wife, LOL!!!!!

By the way, my latest post wasn't directed at you. You are one of my favorite posters / urban terrorists on this board. Rock on, Kendricks...

Yours in Christ

I didn't think that was directed at me, Dogster. I knew a lot of guys who so overidentified with being marines that their whole identity was wrapped up in their rank and occupation. I always thought that was kind of sad - I have worked a number of different jobs, but have always considered myself to be "me" first, and only considered my job to be my occupation, and a small part of who "I" am.

Of course, now that I am also Kendricks, I am not so sure who I am anymore, but that is another issue altogether.

Yours in Internet Addiction,

Kendricks

My 2cents on how to change things:
1. Campaign finance reform, culminating in a return to 1 person - 1 vote, not the current $1 - 1 vote. Public Financing will be required. For those who complain of the cost, I am certain it is cheaper than the S&L bailout, The Enron gauging of California/Debacle and all the other financial scandles.
2. If you don't vote, you are actually helping those who want to take power. If you want to protest, vote for the person you have never heard of. They probably aren't bought off, and some outsiders in the system will shake things up.

The problem is politics. Two leading parties (elites controlling us) are the problem. There are too many egomaniacs and spinners within those two groups.

Solution: Somehow (by magic) educate our citizens about these parasites. No likely.

By cutting taxes we can cut lots of goverment programs that are in a crusade to SAVE us. "If one person's life benefits [politicians] from this program [at the expense of our suckers], then it is all worth it."

If you got any brains, you would give up the thought of trying to save humanity [unless of course you're willing to go on a crusade to try to see us the light] and take care of yourself. Get rich and if the goverment tries to screw you, move...it's a big planet.

Don't take me wrong. Overall, this is still the best country, but if tomorrow Japan happens to be a better place for myself, look for me to say great things about Japan.

Jarocho

Dogster, you need to mellow out. As mentioned above, I greatly value intellect. I should perhaps restate that all SELF PROCLAIMED intellectuals are shitheads. I have found great wisdom coming from some pretty (formally) uneducated people on construction sites. If I called one of them an intellectual, I would probably get hit. The self proclaimed intellectual (ie Chomsky) usually has no experience in the real world, but knows exactly what is right for you, whether you want it or not.
I am willing to value any opinion coming from someone with life experience. If all they do all day is read books and formulate opinions, they are probably full of shit.
Reading is valuable, but when it COMPLEMENTS experience, not when it is in lieu of experience.

Wow, thanks POWERSLAVE. I didn't realize that Einstein was so full of shit.

Einstein accomplished something. What has your hero Chomsky accomplished, except whine?

I'll answer this one, Dogster. Chomsky did publish the following books on Linguistics:

Barriers. Linguistic Inquiry Monograph 13, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986.

Knowledge of Language: Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1986.

Language and Problems of Knowledge: The Managua Lectures, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1987.

Language in a Psychological Setting. Sophia Linguistica Working Papers in Linguistics, No. 22, Sophia University, Tokyo, 1987.

Generative Grammar: Its Basis, Development and Prospects. Studies in English Linguistics and Literature, Special Issue, Kyoto University of Foreign Studies, 1988.

"Some Notes on Economy of Derivation and Representation." In I. Laka and A. Mahajan (eds) Functional Heads and Clause Structure. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 10, 43-74, 1989. Reprinted in Robert Freidin (ed) Principles and Parameters in Comparative Grammar, Current Studies in Linguistics Series No. 20, 417-454, Cambridge: MIT Press, 1991.

"On the Nature, Use and Acquisition of Language." W. Lycan (ed) Mind and Cognition: A Reader, 627-646, Oxford: Blackwell, 1990.

"Linguistics and Adjacent Fields: A Personal View." In A. Kasher (ed) The Chomskyan Turn. 3-25, Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, 1991.

"Linguistics and Cognitive Science: Problems and Mysteries." In A. Kasher (ed) The Chomskyan Turn. 26-53, Oxford and Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell, 1991.

"Explaining Language Use." Philosophical Topics, 20(1), Spring 1992.

"Language and Interpretation: Philosophical Reflections and Empirical Inquiry." In John Earman (ed) Inference, Explanation, and Other Philosophical Frustrations: Essays in the Philosophy of Science. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1992.

"A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory." In K. Hale and S.J. Keyser (eds) The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger. 1-52, Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 1993.

Language and Thought. Wakefield, RI: Moyer Bell, 1993.

(with Howard Lasnik) "The Theory of Principles and Parameters." In J. Jacbos, A. von Stechow, W. Sternefeld and T. Vennemann (eds) Syntax: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. 506-569, Berline and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1993.

"Bare Phrase Structure." Cambridge: MITWPL, January 1994. Reprinted in Otero Festschrift. Georgetown University Press (in press).

"Naturalism and Dualism in the Study of Language and Mind." International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 2, September 1994 (in press).

Some excerpts from his biography also include:

"In 1955, Chomsky received his Ph. D. from the University of Pennsylvania, however, most of the research leading to this degree was done at Harvard University between 1951 and 1955. Since receiving his Ph. D., Chomsky has taught at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where he now holds the Ferrari P. Ward Chair of Modern Language and Linguistics.

"Chomsky has made his reputation in linguistics. He learned some of the historical principles of linguistics from his father, William, who was a Hebrew scholar. In fact, some of his early research, which he did for his Masters, was on the modern spoken Hebrew language. Among his many accomplishments, he is most famous for his work on generative grammar, which developed from his interest in modern logic and mathematical foundations. As a result, he applied it to the description of natural languages."

I don't necessarily agree Chomsky's world view (I'm more of a Neitszche and Kaczynski fan myself), but it certainly seems absurd to say he didn't accomplish anything but whine.

What have YOU accomplished?

Dogster,

Could you say a little bit about what each of these authors have got you thinking about?

Ward Curchill
Manning Marable
Ben Badikian,
Orianna Falaci

Chomsky is widely credited with being the greatest living linguist, and many consider him to be the greatest living intellectual. (Hah!) This work is not related to his political activism.

In the '50s, he demonstrated that language and language structure were much more complex than had previously been believed. This was significant because "behavioristic" explanations dominated the field. Along the way, he was one of the first to dispense with behaviorist beliefs which dominated theories about brain and mind. In the process, he helped initiate the "cognitive revolution." Before you claim that this is all pure theoretical blah, understand that his work has played a huge role in developing Artificial Intelligence, as well as a number of interventions used by neurologists and speech pathologists. A little known and little publicized fact is that much of his funding comes from the US military. Go figure!

W. Churchill: Has published and discussed the US government's Counter Intelligence Program (COINTELPRO) papers in great detail. The papers detail the govt's role in sabotaging political groups that deviate from the government's point of view. The documents suggest a US role in numerous assassinations (e.g., Martin Luther King). Churchill also writes about Native American issues.

Manning Marable: Writes a lot about African American issues, but also social issues in general.

Ben Badikian: A Pulitzer Prize winning journalist and author of "The Media Monopoly." He has, over the last 20 years, documented how only a handful of corporations control mass media. So basically, a few giant corporations control the lions share of media of any kind: newspapers, books, movies, TV, magazines, internet, etc. The implication is that these media are not as free and diverse as they appear.

Oriana Falaci: Italian journalist who managed to conduct very candid interviews some of the worlds' most powerful leaders in the 70's, 80's and 90's.

There are plenty of others. Lots of great IDEAS out there. These folks might be perceived as somewhat "lefty," but they don't have a monopoly on good ideas. And you don't have to be a lefty to appreciate what they have to say.

Theodore Kaczynski: A former math teacher and author. Not sure what else he's done.

"A little known and little publicized fact is that much of his funding comes from the US military."

Hey Dogster - who do you think the US Departement of defense pays more money to every year, Chomsky or Powerslave?

Dogster,

There is no doubting Chomskys brilliance, but I do not buy into most of his political views. He is to far out on the fringe for me. What a bomb thrower.

I am a big Thomas Sowell fan. He is labeled very conservative but he is really just a pragmatic academic. He does not seem to be as political as some of them out there.

Thomas Jefferson was indeed a class act. We owe a large part of our freedoms and our sucsess as a country to him. But I think my favorite founding father is Benjamin Franklin. He was the ultimate renneisance man. And he was not shy about his whoring around either. A real monger.

My own personal view is that there never was, and never has been since, such a concentration of extraordinary men like those who collaborated on our declaration of Independence and our Constitution. Well, with the exception of course of many Clubhombre collaborators. LOL.

Oh and going way off Topic from an Off topic, thanks for the recomendation on El Agave. Tried it out a couple of weeks ago. It was indeed excellent.

Kendricks: It has to be Chomsky. He probably gets more than Kaczynski, too. TK doesn't really give them what they want.

Batster: Glad that you liked "El Agave." It is the best Mexican food in the region, IMHO. And I've done plenty of research on this! Lets hear it for eating out (latinas).

If any of y'all want to blow your mind about the US Government, check out the stuff about COINTELPRO. Simply check out one of the books that publishes the documents (e.g. "The COINTELPRO Papers Documents from the FBI's Secret Wars Against Dissent in the United States." by Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall. Updated Edition due soon...). That way you can draw your own conclusions, independent of the commentary of "Intellectuals." But let me add that if you are unaware of this stuff, you are probably operating from a propaganda-based view of the US Government. I'm not saying that taking a look at this will change your political views, or make you into the second coming of Che Guevarra. But it WILL shatter your illusions. A good thing, consistent with the Jeffersonian ideal.

Thomas Sowell is pretty interesting, I agree. He writes about "self-congratulation as a basis for social policy." This self-congratulation (mostly by politically correct lefties) has led to all sorts of policy disasters in education, crime, family disintegration, etc. With Sowell, you've gotta remember that he's at Stanford's Hoover Institute, a premier think tank for the "conservative" powers that be in this country. These are basically the dudes that determine many of this country's policies, but you rarely hear about them.

I might add that I'm not a bomb-throwing type. Ya say you want a revolution? We'll you know, we all want to change the world. But when you start talkin' about money for people with minds that hate, well all I can say is brother you'll have to wait. That's the way it's gotta be. Alright?

Ha! I guess my last post scared y'all away... Please don't let this thread die. Otherwise I'll have to go back to that wretched NBA sports thread and argue with them...

Being intellectuals are not real jobs?

Since when?

Confucius and Socrates would argue that theirs is the second oldest profession on earth next to you know what.

Well they are now talking about spending around a TRILLION DOLLARS on Defense and Homeland Security to protect against guys with box cutters.

Just a thought, what if we quit letting the oil industry and other multinational corporatations SCREW these people and quit pissing them off. Seems cheaper to me. These corporate groups put in puppet dictators that they can control and enrich at the expense of the locals. Read "Jihad vs McWorld" for a viewpoint that our corporate media doesn't want exposed.

Capitalism in itself isn't a bad thing but like fire, when left uncontrolled and unregulated has no qualms about destroying the things around it.

Corporations are not bad either. But they can be run in a profitable fashion that does not damage the society they exist in rather than the "short term profits at the expense of everything else" manner that they are being run now.

Just some things that are pissing me off.

Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind. And when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the rights of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their rights unto the leader and gladly so. How do I know? For this is what I have done. And I am Caesar. – Julius Caesar

http://www.copvcia.com/

One more thought about the corporate media (far more real than the "liberal" media). I see repeated bashing of CNN for having a liberal bias, but I see no one expressing a concern about FOX News (Run by Roger Ailes, former head of the RNC) channel being a propaganda arm of the Republican party.

Notice I am not claiming them to have a Conservative agenda. The Republican Party had a choice between a Conservative (John McCain) and a Corporate Shill (Bush). And they went with the money.

Enough for now....

One word...Decaf!

Muy interestante, Headinsouth... More coffee!!! Gotta support those third world cash crops...

Yeah, I made the mistake of taking a moment to pay attention to what was going on.

I am registered Libertarian but I think I may have to change to one the major parties and try to change somethings from within the system.

Sorry Kendricks, but I want to keep the Nukes from flying.

Headinsouth, have you read about the Bush Administration's recent discovery? They figured out that global warming is occuring! ;)

I hear the energy companies aren't too happy...the ozone must really be going to hell if this administration is willing to admit that.

Good to see you came around to the realization that some things, politics in this case, must be changed gradually.

Headinsouth, make sure you email your Demopublican "representatives" with your concerns. They care about you, and your thoughts and feelings are important to them.

Now that I got a good laugh out of my system, let us recognize the truth: the Demopublicans are owned by the people who finance their campaigns, but do pay attention to opinion polls in order to craft their speeches, TV commercials, and campaign slogans. Their policies, however, are catered to ensuring that the cash flow needed to fund their PR machines is not damages.

Good luck trying to "effect change from within the system". HA!

d'Artagnan: Yes, the Bush Administration acknowledged that global warming is occurring. The Bush Administration also opined that nothing can be done about it. So the energy companies really have nothing to be upset about; their boys in the White House will take care of them just fine.

Anyway, with 6,000,000,000 people now infesting the planet, the majority of whom are clamoring to have the same standard of living as the US, all environmental measures can more accurately be seen as trying to hold back the tide with a broom. So actually, the Bush Administration is probably right - there is nothing that can be done, so just kick back, and enjoy the decline and fall!!!

So Kendricks, where can I cut to the chase and sign up with the Demopublicans. They don't seem to offer that as a choice on the list.

I encourage my friends who don't vote, to go back to the polls and just vote for whichever candidate they havn't seen ads from. I take that as a sign that they haven't been bought out. I consider not voting as a vote for corruption.

If anyone wants to understand the situation in Afganistan read "The Grand Chessboard", By Zbigniew Brzezinski.

The Demopublicans split their operations into two "competing" parties as subterfuge. These two branches are often referred to as "Republicans" and "Democrats". I always vote, by the way. I intend to vote for Matt Hooker http://www.matthooker.com/ in the next election.

I tend to think of them as the:

DEMONcrats, and the
REPUGNANTcans.

My personal opinion is they only listen when they fear:

x Not getting re-elected

x for their lives

I suggest voting ! On the other subject I offer no guide for behavior.

It's not that I'm violent, just thoroughly disgusted.

Well when they Dem-o-rats stop trying to take away my guns and quit rasing my taxes then I'll vote for them. NOT!

The Republican Party had a choice between a Conservative (John McCain)"

dude,

Can I get some of that shit you're smoking?

McCain a conservate?

You fucking kidding right?

GC, what would you consider Barry Goldwater, a pinko commie?

Or is Mr King of Corporate Fundraisers, George W Bush who abandons States Rights if it appears that it would interfere with his coup down in Florida, to be a standard bearer of conservitism. Personal responsibility is paramount except when it comes to his alcoholic, drunk driving, cocaine snorting past. Oh yeah those were all the "youthful indescretions" of a 30 year old man.

IMHO Conservatives tend to focus on personsonal responsiblity and Liberals on social responsiblity and each side can go too far. These aren't mutually exclusive, they are ends of a spectrum. It is the dynamic created by the push and pull of these philosophies that keep us somewhat in the center.

Another way of looking at it is the Conservatives are DAD and the liberals are MOM and we need input from both to achieve a balance.

Look into the history of American politics and you will find the parties positions will change, even if the names remain the same depending on the attitude of the populace.

If Conservatives are Dad and Liberals are Mom what's that make people like Ralph Nader and Pat Buccannon? Or Libertarians? Or the Clintons who neither looked nor acted like my dad or mom?

How about politicians are just plain crooks and psycho maniacs who choose a label merely for convenience? If you or I get caught with a minor in bed or stealing people's savings or ordering our enemies killed we are sent to prison. Politicians get a rap on their fingers and are warned not to get caught the next time.

Who cares? Politicians are corrupt. If they are not corrupt to begin with, they are either forced into corruption by the system or they are no longer politicians.

-Superman-

Or is Mr King of Corporate Fundraisers, George W Bush who abandons States Rights if it appears that it would interfere with his coup down in Florida,""

So you find yourself in agreement with Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton?

Interesting shit.

Dude You ain't no Libertarian.

If Conservatives are Dad and Liberals are Mom what's that make people like Ralph Nader and Pat Buccannon? Or Libertarians? Or the Clintons who neither looked nor acted like my dad or mom? LOL Tight Fit.

In the limited space here, I have to simplify some things. The spectrum? (continueum?, mathmaticians input please) of political philosophy has many points on it and I was just wanting to point out that they are all part of the whole picture, not independant, mutually exclusive concepts.

Man is a social/pack animal, dependant on others. It is only in a civilized, team-oriented society that our greatest achievements can be realized.

I can't agree that all politicians have to be corrupt any more than all cops have to be corrupted by their power.
Government is created by all of us in a society joining together to regulate the areas where we must interact. We get whatever standard of behavior we require of those we put in charge.

GC wrote: So you find yourself in agreement with Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton?
Well if they too recoginze the truth, I am not going to deny it because I don't agree with all of their thoughts. There were so many crooked things that happened in Florida starting with Katherine Harris being both Florida's secretary of state in charge of elections AND Bush's campaign co-chairperson. No conflict of interest there! I could go on but other's have written entire books filled with little FACTS like that.
The thing that pisses me off the most is that the Supreme Court, represented by Antonin Scalia (who's son was working for the law firm representing Bush) put a halt to any vote counting because - it might interefere with the "perception" that George W. had won the election.
So NOBODY'S vote counted.

GC - "Dude You ain't no Libertarian." Perhaps not.

I joined the Libertarian party because I was fed up with the smugness of the 2 main parties and wanted to shake up the system. I was also getting sick of our lawsuit happy society in which no-ones stupidity was their own fault. Where if I stick my hand in a running garbage disposal it is somehow the manufacturers fault. People must take resposibility for their own actions.

But in the same way I am getting annoyed by the me first attitude of - I don't owe anything back to the society that allowed me to achieve my successes. Multinational corporations being the worst offenders.

As I said in an earlier post; to be truly a "self made man" would require one to forgo all the benefits our society has to offer and go off to some island and wear skins and use wooden implements. I'll give you fire rather than you waiting for lightning to strike a tree and "discover" it from there.

Think about creating a world in which you would like for your elderly Mom and your children to live in.

I hope that my ramblings are understandable to most.

BTW - One should note that the "perception" of Bush's victory was created by John Ellis, a Bush cousin, over at Fox news calling the election for Bush and the other corportate media blindly following that lead.

And I think 'GC - "Dude You ain't no Libertarian." Perhaps not. ' Should read "GC - "Dude You ain't no Libertarian." Perhaps I am not."

Gotta go

Headinsouth, it's probably true that not all politicans are corrupt. Or that all corporations are bent on monopolistic practices. Or that all German soldiers in WW II were guilty of genocide. Ditto with modern day soldiers in Israel.

The problem is that our social systems may start out as means to ensure a functioning community but all too often end up as vehicles for those who desire power over others. As individuals few of us are evil or seek to hurt others. However, as an aggregate the result is often a disaster for many unfortunates.

Some people are happy with the lot their home rests on and the salary that they make. Others can never have enough. And a very sick group will never be happy unless they not only have more of their own but until you have less of your own.

I place all politicans in the third group regardless of their expressed good intentions.

TF said - Some people are happy with the lot their home rests on and the salary that they make. Others can never have enough. And a very sick group will never be happy unless they not only have more of their own but until you have less of your own.

So true. I guess I got spoiled by my small town upbringing where you could tell who was who, and the jerks could be identified and avoided. They actually felt reprecussions for their actions.

Went down to the zona last night, and spent some time with Fernanda at La Tropa. I feel MUCH better now.....

Politicians are professional liars... evidence sufficient in that 90% of them are lawyers. They spew what the majority will swallow, whether or not what they sell us has anything to do with our interests.

It's a club. There are perks and there are costs. They calculate everything calculable before moving. They are acting in their own best interests alone, whether they be Republican, Democrat or other.

Heck, an honest man couldn't get elected since the era of the electronic media. Forget it. Live for your family and just try to live with the politricksters do to you. Anything else is wheel-spinning.

Do make it to your favorite chica spot now and then, though, for bullshit cleansing. I suggest Pattaya.

Yeah Indyla, Pattaya is definitely on my agenda next time I can make it to Thailand. The beach scene sounds fun. Although from some of the posts, they are toning it down alot. Ooops... I'm getting on-topic in the off-topic area. ;) Later

Kendricks, in the "thoughts on life" thread you seemed puzzled at my perception of your greatest weakness.

I said, "...As open as I believe you consider yourself to be, I think the truth is that you have already accepted too many "facts" and "truths"..."

In my opinion, your acceptance that Democrats and Republicans are the same is evidence of this. Do both parties have some corrupt individuals? Yes. Do both parties employ similar methods to ensure their survival? Yes. Are the parties the same? Absolutely not.

Your black and white view that since both parties have similarities that they must be the same is certainly not a unique one, as is well evidenced by some of the responses in this thread. The problem I see with this view is that at best it slows and at worst it prevents one from learning and understanding some very real differences between the two major parties, and the implications of how our lives can be affected by having one party in power vs the other.

In simpler terms, since you already know all you need to know about "Demopublicans", you are very unlikely to learn anything from them. Both parties have brilliant minds on their side, and the "political game" itself is enormously complex and fluid, so in my opinion, you are missing out on a lot of knowledge.

I must also state that the black and white, all or nothing perception that some people have on this site regarding other people, in this case politicians, surprises me. Do they consider their characters weak enough that they would automatically become corrupt if they went into politics? How about family members and/or people they highly respect now? Is their faith in these people so flimsy that they would disassociate themselves because the political system only attracts crooks or turns everyone into crooks unconditionally?

I say it surprises me on this site because we ourselves are evidence of a false myth regarding perceptions. Are we all old, overweight, uneducated, desperate, smelly, open-mouth breathing barbarious predators? Then why say all politicians are lying crooks?

BTW, I would have responded soon, but I was busy doing girls in Brazil and Argentina.

D'Artagnan, my observation that the Republicans and the Democrats are part of the same machinery is not a snap judgment based upon propaganda, it is the result of years of observation of their tactics and positions. There are minor differences, to be sure, but in the big picture, they both band together to keep the outsiders OUT, and to ensure their cushy careers and pork barrel funding.

Asking "which party is better, Republicans or Democrats" is similar to asking "which is the one true religion - Catholic or Protestant"? Both are nearly identical, although members of each are deluded into believing otherwise.

Vietnam.....
I'm sitting here watching "Flight of the Intruder" (2 Naval Aviators bomb the main SAM site near Hanoi - against orders).

This isn't something I know that much about. More than they they teach you in basic college history, but I tend to read older histories.

I have seen many of you reference your experience there. Many people talk of how that war "didn't make sense." Did any of you veterans see that?

So I wonder? What if you were to look at the Vietnam war with the viewpoint that its purpose was to consume gasoline and munitions and to provide a tactical developement base for the Defense industry?

I am sure this is not an original thought. I just haven't read what's out there. And I know that at a basic level all wars will produce these occurences. But, were this occurences unusual/extreme?

It seems I remember reading that, in his farewell, that Knee-Jerk Liberal Dwight D. Eisenhower warned of the danger of a growing Military/Industrial Complex. This would be the same time the interventionist decisions on the Far East were being made.

Let's leave aside debate over the Domino Theory and assume that it was necessary to check Communist expansion. My question involves, was the war fought in an excessively consumptive manner regardless of its success? And, was there a less consumptive alternative that would have been more successful?

Just the kind of whacked out shit I think about when I can't be in TJ.

If you believe in military industrial complexes, you will love the current debate over the Crusader artillery system that Bush is trying to cancel. I would not put my money on Bush in this battle, as billions are involved.
Incidently no one can come up with a recognizable threat that the present Palladin system cannot handle and the Army does not want crusader.
They may get it anyway.

If that doesn't do the trick read up on the procurement of the Bradley fighting vehicle 20 years ago. In some countries they shoot people for treason for this short of shit.

Sorry guys, I know this isn't a political board but this is one of the few discussion forums I have access to.

Also let me reiterate that I don't think all of either party are good/bad. (John McCain - non bought out Rep., Joe Lieberman - bought out Dem.)

But, the hypocrisy that is going on now is mind boggling. To have the Republicans, who led the deregulation charge that created this business fiasco to now get up and blame the Clinton administration and Democrats for this situation is absurd.

A perfect example is the law that was passed that allowed accounting firms to both audit and consult for the same company (think Aurthur Anderson), Clinton Vetoed, and then it was passed it over his veto. And now it is all Clinton's fault?

Look into voting records to find the truth. And do it while you can, they are now trying to pass a law to stop recording votes for historical reference because it is too expensive!?!

Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.

Different generation, same politics, higher tolerances for dishonesty. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Power mongers are like us chica mongers in that they know where they can get it, and it is, for as long as they pay or barter for it, in their control.

Left, right and center of politics has shown me nothing that distinguishes one from another, except a show to give the working stiffs like us something to keep our minds busy so we don't get too wise to their agendas.

I love politics, can you tell?