The Pendulum Swings...

[coprolalia]

---

Members do not see this ad.

So, I'm sitting here watching Maobama on the television (again)... I'm recollecting the past 8.5 years... I'm recollecting even back to the Clinton administration...

How the hell did this country get so goddamned far off track?!??!

Someone, please tell me! PLEASE!

We are just focusing on completely stupid, irrelevant BULLSH*T right now. Sure, Bush was a colossal, international joke, but this new Joker is trying to fix **** that has no relevance right now.

I mean, we're spending money (we don't have in the budget) in the wrong places, but worse cutting more in even more wrong places, and generally addressing touchy-feely crap that is not going to get and keep the U.S. as the primary decision maker and driver of world affairs.

Does this malignant, naive, self-interested xenophobe really think that, ten years from now, his legacy is going to make this country stronger?

IT'S MADNESS!!! Someone, please explain to me how - as we get further and further off-track because the pendulum has swung all the way to the other side - how we stop this craziness and get the pendulum back to the middle. I'm getting intractable nausea from all this teeter-tottering!!

-copro

 

[deleted50478]

So, I'm sitting here watching Maobama on the television (again)... I'm recollecting the past 8.5 years... I'm recollecting even back to the Clinton administration...

How the hell did this country get so goddamned far off track?!??!

Someone, please tell me! PLEASE!

We are just focusing on completely stupid, irrelevant BULLSH*T right now. Sure, Bush was a colossal, international joke, but this new Joker is trying to fix **** that has no relevance right now.

I mean, we're spending money (we don't have in the budget) in the wrong places, but worse cutting more in even more wrong places, and generally addressing touchy-feely crap that is not going to get and keep the U.S. as the primary decision maker and driver of world affairs.

Does this malignant, naive, self-interested xenophobe really think that, ten years from now, his legacy is going to make this country stronger?

IT'S MADNESS!!! Someone, please explain to me how - as we get further and further off-track because the pendulum has swung all the way to the other side - how we stop this craziness and get the pendulum back to the middle. I'm getting intractable nausea from all this teeter-tottering!!

-copro

Your rant is based on an incorrect presumption. You assume that Barry wants to make this country stronger. On the contrary, he thinks this country is evil and should not have so much power.

"In America, there's a failure to appreciate Europe's leading role in the world."

"Too often, the United States has not pursued and sustained engagement with our neighbors. We have been too easily distracted by other priorities, and have failed to see that our own progress is tied directly to progress throughout the Americas."

"While the United States has done much to promote peace and prosperity in the hemisphere, we have at times been disengaged, and at times we sought to dictate our terms."

"I think when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody."

 

[pgg]

How the hell did this country get so goddamned far off track?!??!

We have a 2-party system.

When party A upsets and scares a lot of people for 8 years, and then puts forth a weak no-change candidate coupled with a crazy scary-incompetent candidate, party B is very appealing.

Doesn't much matter what party B says they'll do, so long as it's not what party A did.


(Values for A and B are left as an exercise for the reader.)

 

[coprolalia]

What scares me, though, is the seeming "pass" this guy gets on just about everything he offers, at least in some people's minds, just because he is who he is (and what he represents to certain people).

That represents, in no uncertain terms, a personality cult. And, the willingness of certain "Americans" to give him what is tantamount to Carte Blanche on some of the silliness he's putting out there worries me about the overall current zeitgeist in this country: namely, "talk sweetly to me and I'll listen... we'll worry about the details later... if at all."

Very, very frustrating.

-copro

 

[coprolalia]

Example...

My sister-in-law (who's Hispanic American) took a job in Spain in 2007, so my older brother (and my niece and nephew, who are still quite young), moved over there with them, obviously.

I keep up with them on Facebook and Skype.

When Maobama won the Nobel Peace Prize, you'd have thought that Jesus H. Christ himself had come down from heaven and given the award personally to the man.

I had to bite my tongue (believe it or not) not to unleash the usual "copro unabashed torrent of free thinking" on her Facebook homepage. What I did say (quite mildly, I might add) was immediately taken as a sign that Rush Limbaugh had somehow hacked my account. "How dare I question this??!? Who [am I] to say that the Nobel committee was wrong?" And, I genuinely like this woman. After all, anyone who can tolerate my brother is part angel in my book. (haha)

But, I mean, there was absolutely no questioning, like happened here even among his proponents as well as the man himself, as to whether or not he even deserved the award.

Now, I expect that they've been in Europe long enough to feel the "taint" of the European way of thinking... but, come on! Even people who support the guy here were saying, "WTF?!??" when he got the award.

I worry. Where does this man's loyalties truly lay?

-copro

 

[deleted126335]

How the hell did this country get so goddamned far off track?!??!

Someone, please tell me! PLEASE!

-copro

After WW2 we held all the aces. and we played them well:

-A generation of Americans tempered by the depression and the war. No stranger to hard work and thrift.
-The only economy left standing after the war.
-The strongest military
-Abundant natural resources
-two oceans to insulate us
-Capitalism, strong private property rights, the rule of law.
-A society that cherished education AND valued it enough to believe that access to a good public education was in the public interest
-One of the most equitable and tolerant societies in the world, So that the world's best, brightest, and hardest working wanted to come here for the opportunities.

Over the last couple of decades all of the above have been either pissed away, corrupted, copied, or rendered somewhat irrelevant by technology.

 

[coprolalia]

After WW2 we held all the aces. and we played them well:

-A generation of Americans tempered by the depression and the war. No stranger to hard work and thrift.
-The only economy left standing after the war.
-The strongest military
-Abundant natural resources
-two oceans to insulate us
-Capitalism, strong private property rights, the rule of law.
-A society that cherished education AND valued it enough to believe that access to a good public education was in the public interest
-One of the most equitable and tolerant societies in the world, So that the world's best, brightest, and hardest working wanted to come here for the opportunities.

Over the last couple of decades all of the above have been either pissed away, corrupted, copied, or rendered somewhat irrelevant by technology.

Interesting perspective, Doze. Definitely interesting.

-copro

 

[deleted126335]

Interesting perspective, Doze. Definitely interesting.

-copro

Thanks.

 

[foxtrot]

We need to start focusing on America again and not on everyone else.

Look at Detroit, it looks like a city in a third world country. The foreclosure and unemployment rates there are ridiculous. They cannot even get grocery stores to move into many parts of the city. It is very sad.
Also, because the state of Hawaii is now so broke, they are looking at shortening the school year by 17 days. CBS reported that they were more than likely going to goto a 4 day school week. This certainly is not the way to better American's educational system.

 

[cfdavid]

So, I'm sitting here watching Maobama on the television (again)... I'm recollecting the past 8.5 years... I'm recollecting even back to the Clinton administration...

How the hell did this country get so goddamned far off track?!??!

Someone, please tell me! PLEASE!

We are just focusing on completely stupid, irrelevant BULLSH*T right now. Sure, Bush was a colossal, international joke, but this new Joker is trying to fix **** that has no relevance right now.

I mean, we're spending money (we don't have in the budget) in the wrong places, but worse cutting more in even more wrong places, and generally addressing touchy-feely crap that is not going to get and keep the U.S. as the primary decision maker and driver of world affairs.

Does this malignant, naive, self-interested xenophobe really think that, ten years from now, his legacy is going to make this country stronger?

IT'S MADNESS!!! Someone, please explain to me how - as we get further and further off-track because the pendulum has swung all the way to the other side - how we stop this craziness and get the pendulum back to the middle. I'm getting intractable nausea from all this teeter-tottering!!

-copro

I hear your frustrations. I too agree that the Republicans have strayed WAY off track. Thus, I'm hesitant to make this a partisan problem (not that you were).

My personal view is that we have a "power elite" in this country with their hands in just about everything. You have to give em credit though, because they're as organized as crime can get. They have their hands in banking, media, "think tanks", NPO's, intelligence, gov't. You name it.

A conspiracy? Not really. Just a very organized group of people that run the show, and are VERY self-interested (which by exclusion means not-so-interested in the country or it's people in general).

It is what it is. I feel there's a boiling point coming our way though. More and more information is being made available via the internet (not yet a consolidated, controlled source of information. Yet.) that is helping expose the situation as it is. Grass roots organizations are cropping up everywhere, and at increasing rates. Previous generations didn't stand a chance with 2,4, and 7, and a handful of families or corporations controlling print media. This is no longer the case.

You have organizations like http://oathkeepers.org/oath/ And whether one believes in domestic enemies or not, people are losing faith in their (our) government. This makes it ripe for revolution. But, I think, we have a long way to go.

****I'd just leave it with this. Be very careful where you get your information. If something looks "off", cross check facts via alternate sources. And then cross check some more. It's not THAT hard to ween out the truth, or something close to it.

And we all need to start THINKING FOR OURSELVES, rather than listening to the "talking heads" in the mainstream media, which is bought and paid for many times over IMHO.

cf

 

[Bertelman]

****I'd just leave it with this. Be very careful where you get your information. If something looks "off", cross check facts via alternate sources. And we all need to start THINKING FOR OURSELVES, rather than listening to the "talking heads" in the mainstream media, which is bought and paid for many times over IMHO.

cf

Problem is, the majority of the populace (of any country) is easily duped. My mom can't even figure out which email hoaxes are true, no matter how many times I send her the Snopes links.

Try having a discussion that does more than just scratch the surface of the current turmoil of our country. Well-educated people don't even know what to believe, there are so many messages out there.

 

[Gern Blansten]

Now, I expect that they've been in Europe long enough to feel the "taint"

So, they live in Amsterdam?? I thought you said Spain.🙂

 

[racerx]

So, they live in Amsterdam?? I thought you said Spain.🙂

 

[racerx]

duplicate

 

[deleted50478]

So, they live in Amsterdam?? I thought you said Spain.🙂

Feeling the taint is most common in Holland, but there's taint to be felt elsewhere in Europe.

 

[coprolalia]

Barcelona, to be precise. I've been there a few times, and the women are all thin and beautiful.

Like I've said before, if Obama is successful in "downgrading" us to Europe, I'm going there. Permanently.

-copro

 

[cfdavid]

Problem is, the majority of the populace (of any country) is easily duped. My mom can't even figure out which email hoaxes are true, no matter how many times I send her the Snopes links.

Try having a discussion that does more than just scratch the surface of the current turmoil of our country. Well-educated people don't even know what to believe, there are so many messages out there.

This is true. There's a lot of intentional MIS/DIS-information PURPOSELY perpetuated out in the press.

When people think of geopolitics and global intelligence "wars", they think of James Bond and Jason Bourne etc etc. But, intelligence is mainly INFORMATION, and the dissemination/misinformation, or skewed information in order to accomplish any number of "ends".

And it's not just national intelligence agencies that play this game. It's powerful private interest groups. Powerful global corporations etc.

When the owner of US News and World Report is an ardent Zionist who contributes financially to illegal Israeli settlements in some town in Palestinian territories, do you think it's going to be reported that human rights and violations of international law are going to be reported?

When Scott Ritter (former chief UN weapons inspector in the pre-Iraq War era and a former US Marine) came out vehimently against any military intervention in Iraq under the guise of "weapons of mass destruction", and has been making an equally voiciferous case AGAINST war with Iran, do you think he's making some powerful enemies??

Ritter was later accussed in the media as beging an alleged PEDOPHILE. These charges were later dropped and sealed, but the damage was done (as was intended. i.e. to FULLY discredit and silence him).

What a coincedence that the 89 year old dude that went nuts in the holocaust memorial center and killed the security guard, was also, later accussed of having had kiddy porn material on his computer (from an "annonymous" federal source; annonymous and federal = a free for all to publish without any journalistic credibility). SERIOUSLY? Oh, really.

Hmm. I wonder if these are attempts by very powerful interests at discrediting people that disagree with their agenda or views (the 89 yo thought the holocaust was a bit trumped for financial gain such as has been suggested by historians and writers such as Norman Finkelstein)...... What the guy did was reprehensible, but was he really a pedophile on top of all the other things he surely was???? Or did the ADL and it's smear machine kick into high gear to MAKE SURE he was as discredited as could possibly be??? Maybe?

We MUST THINK FOR OURSELVES. Sure, the masses of people will never really think for themselves. They'll allow sound bites to shape their views and beliefs. This has always been the case. It's those who THINK FOR THEMSELVES that can go on to shape real change.... We'll see.

***disclosure: if you're not familiar with the concepts, groups, individuals, organizations that I've referenced, just look em up! do some research, and cross-reference from multiple sources, especially when any particular source seems to have too strong a viewpoint etc.

 

[coprolalia]

Well, without going too far out of bounds and invoking Godwin's law, suffice it to say that the Holocaust was real, it was terrible, and even if only 100 people (in lieu of 6 million, which I personally believe is a closer to true number) were killed under its principles, it still serves to illustrate the depths of human cruelty and dangers of blindly following the zeitgeist of a despot in a society that, at the time, was at least partially unaware (willingly or not) to the true horrors that its leader was engaging in to further a twisted and completely evil cause... 'nuff said...

Otherwise, your point is well made. People trust the media to "get it right" far too much in this country. I might have mentioned before, I have been quoted in the media a few times - from local newspaper to a national press release on a medically-related subject - and, when I finally read the actual quotes that were attributed to me - in quotation marks - it was amusing and at the same time shocking how what I appeared to have said and what I actually meant were so different. In one case, the quote was just completely factually wrong and out of context, and the reporter either misheard what I'd said (I hope) or purposefully did it to better fit his story. I didn't matter, ultimately, because the gist of the story was still correct... but the precision of what was reported was WAY off.

There is an element of propaganda in all of what's reported nowadays. The problem is that there is TOO much media competing on incredibly short timeframes for the public's attention. Used to be that a newspaper had 10-12 hours even on the hottest of stories to vet the facts and then report it. Now, we get the news instantaneously and often loaded with disclaimers ("this so-and-so purportedly did such-an-such", etc.). The facts become less important to the scoop.

As far as trying people in the court of public opinion... you're exactly right. Why is it that we protect people under the age of 18 for supposed "crimes" they've committed by not releasing their names in the media before they've actually had their day in court, yet the media will show-up at someone's house when they are simply arrested for possibly having committed some infraction, then blast their name all over the airwaves, and essentially throw allegations of wrongdoing, couched within all the "purportedly" and "allegedly" rhetoric, that will potentially ruin that persons life before they even have their day in court?

I've never understood this. As an example, look what happened to that poor dude who was trying to be a good samaritan during the 1996 Atlanta Olympic park bombing. The media did an expert job of trying to ruin that guys life. Did they care? Hell no! They just wanted a story to run. And, they got it.

-copro

 

[amyl]

its the colisseum in rome all over again... if you distract the masses enough you can get away with almost anything.

 

[cfdavid]

Well, without going too far out of bounds and invoking Godwin's law, suffice it to say that the Holocaust was real, it was terrible, and even if only 100 people (in lieu of 6 million, which I personally believe is a closer to true number) were killed under its principles, it still serves to illustrate the depths of human cruelty and dangers of blindly following the zeitgeist of a despot in a society that, at the time, was at least partially unaware (willingly or not) to the true horrors that its leader was engaging in to further a twisted and completely evil cause... 'nuff said...

Otherwise, your point is well made. People trust the media to "get it right" far too much in this country. I might have mentioned before, I have been quoted in the media a few times - from local newspaper to a national press release on a medically-related subject - and, when I finally read the actual quotes that were attributed to me - in quotation marks - it was amusing and at the same time shocking how what I appeared to have said and what I actually meant were so different. In one case, the quote was just completely factually wrong and out of context, and the reporter either misheard what I'd said (I hope) or purposefully did it to better fit his story. I didn't matter, ultimately, because the gist of the story was still correct... but the precision of what was reported was WAY off.

There is an element of propaganda in all of what's reported nowadays. The problem is that there is TOO much media competing on incredibly short timeframes for the public's attention. Used to be that a newspaper had 10-12 hours even on the hottest of stories to vet the facts and then report it. Now, we get the news instantaneously and often loaded with disclaimers ("this so-and-so purportedly did such-an-such", etc.). The facts become less important to the scoop.

As far as trying people in the court of public opinion... you're exactly right. Why is it that we protect people under the age of 18 for supposed "crimes" they've committed by not releasing their names in the media before they've actually had their day in court, yet the media will show-up at someone's house when they are simply arrested for possibly having committed some infraction, then blast their name all over the airwaves, and essentially throw allegations of wrongdoing, couched within all the "purportedly" and "allegedly" rhetoric, that will potentially ruin that persons life before they even have their day in court?

I've never understood this. As an example, look what happened to that poor dude who was trying to be a good samaritan during the 1996 Atlanta Olympic park bombing. The media did an expert job of trying to ruin that guys life. Did they care? Hell no! They just wanted a story to run. And, they got it.

-copro

I 100% agree with the bold. As I'd suggest that all of the atrocities against civilian populations were terrible during those years.

My main point was that when you make strong enemies, bad things (and sometimes untrue things) can happen and in this particular case, the media smear campaign kicked into overdrive to make sure that his ideas weren't to be well received by anyone. They did this by reporting that a "source" said they found pedophilia material on this 89 yo guys computer........ Which was a total distraction (intentional in my opinion) from what he represented which was a guy that disliked Jews and felt the holocaust figures often cited were overstated. Do you see how effective this is??

We didn't see any stories stem from this case, such as other groups that have similar beliefs, or any interviews of Norman Finklestein (whom wrote a book on the "Holocaust Industry" and a Jew himself) did we? No, and that was the point. Label him a pedophile with no evidence whatsoever, and the job is finished. The discussion (and I'm not really arguing that our time is best spent on such things, unless you're the gov't of Switzerland or Germany who's taxpayers have paid out BILLIONS), never took place. And that was the intent. Again, this is my opinion.

As a free thinker, it's my opinion that the enemies that he made by attacking, and thus bringing his political views to the forefront, a holocaust institution (museum), those same enemies, with very significant resources including media, made absolutely certain that his name and any "ideas" he may have held were to be discredited in a round-about way.

This is my opinion. The same, I believe, happened to Scott Ritter, when he made enemies just as powerful and with just as many deep resources from which to defend their interests.

 

[cfdavid]

its the colisseum in rome all over again... if you distract the masses enough you can get away with almost anything.

Exactly. And this is why it's important to watch out for any future distractions. Possible "false flags" that can distract from more pressing needs here at home, and shift the focus abroad, or anywhere from an existing problem. This tactic is ages old, and flurishes in todays world.

Educated people just need to be aware of it, and perhaps as importantly, be aware of the people/groups who have both motive and means to employ such methods.

 

[deleted126335]

When the owner of US News and World Report is an ardent Zionist who contributes financially to illegal Israeli settlements in some town in Palestinian territories, do you think it's going to be reported that human rights and violations of international law are going to be reported?


What a coincedence that the 89 year old dude that went nuts in the holocaust memorial center and killed the security guard, was also, later accussed of having had kiddy porn material on his computer (from an "annonymous" federal source; annonymous and federal = a free for all to publish without any journalistic credibility). SERIOUSLY? Oh, really.

Hmm. I wonder if these are attempts by very powerful interests at discrediting people that disagree with their agenda or views (the 89 yo thought the holocaust was a bit trumped for financial gain such as has been suggested by historians and writers such as Norman Finkelstein)......

What the guy did was reprehensible, but was he really a pedophile on top of all the other things he surely was???? Or did the ADL and it's smear machine kick into high gear to MAKE SURE he was as discredited as could possibly be??? Maybe?

You are a paranoid antisemitic nut job.

 

[proman]

You are a paranoid antisemitic nut job.

👍

 

[coprolalia]

You are a paranoid antisemitic nut job.

Maybe, but there's a baby in that bathwater...

-copro

 

[deleted126335]

Maybe, but there's a baby in that bathwater...

-copro

Where?

 

[coprolalia]

Where?

Ummm... just say the name "Rupert Murdoch" and you'll understand.

-copro

 

[deleted126335]

Ummm... just say the name "Rupert Murdoch" and you'll understand.

-copro

Rupert Murdoch is not jewish, but it is pretty clear that he is an unabashed supporter of Israel. He also does not control CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, NY Times, Washington Post, LA times, et al.

 

[coprolalia]

Rupert Murdoch is not jewish, but it is pretty clear that he is an unabashed supporter of Israel. He also does not control CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, NY Times, Washington Post, LA times, et al.

I don't think that was cfdavid's point.

I think it was that certain very powerful people in world society, like Rupert Murdoch, have not only the access but the ability to sway public opinion they way they see fit. Likewise, they often do it using "underhanded" techniques that serve to inflame rather than enlighten. Furthermore, they cherry-pick what they report, not just the manner of reporting it.

It's becoming less about keeping your eyes on the road and driving on, and more about the inability to look away from the occasional accident scene... and that's a lot of what the highly-rated media has become: sensationalistic, attention-grabbing fluff that titillates without stimulating further thought. Cotton-candy journalism. Selective, at that, and under the control of certain people who only want you to hear their "news", and only if it fits their worldview.

That was the baby in his message.

The bathwater was all of the other personal, unsubstantiated innuendo in that post.

-copro

 

[cfdavid]

You are a paranoid antisemitic nut job.

"anti-Semite" the oldest trick in the book.

Does my opposition to continued Israeli settlements on Palestinian land make me an "anti-Semite". That term has been SO overused that, truly, it no longer carries weight.

And, for the other people on this forum, who's opinion I do care, would an anti-Semite be an active, verifiable, member of a pro-Israel (though not the kind that AIPAC would like) group like this? http://www.jstreet.org/

So, lay off the slander a.shole.

I just don't want the U.S. to allow AIPAC to pressure our forces into "taking out" Iran. I don't want the U.S. to have anything to do with another trumped up charge against another country that will cause US billions of $$, kill perhaps hundreds of thousands of innocent people, put our service men and women in harms way, and multiply America's enemies tenfold. Yet, you try to silence the debate by calling me "anti-Semitic". You're a joke.

 

[cfdavid]

You are a paranoid antisemitic nut job.

I'll even challenge you, though I highly doubt that you're truly up to the task.

I'll make you a deal. I'll provide information supporting my statements right on this forum, for all to see. I'll provide a wide variety of content, from a wide variety of sources.

I have a feeling there will be a lot of popcorn eaters on this one, however, many may feel intimidated (by the likes of you that throw out the dreaded "anti-Semite" so readily) into silence.

We'll let the audience decide. We can start by my justifying each of the points I've already made, and we can go from there, if you want.

Tonight, I need to study, but tomorrow and this weekend, we can do this. Just let me know.

 

[cfdavid]

I don't think that was cfdavid's point.

I think it was that certain very powerful people in world society, like Rupert Murdoch, have not only the access but the ability to sway public opinion they way they see fit. Likewise, they often do it using "underhanded" techniques that serve to inflame rather than enlighten. Furthermore, they cherry-pick what they report, not just the manner of reporting it.

It's becoming less about keeping your eyes on the road and driving on, and more about the inability to look away from the occasional accident scene... and that's a lot of what the highly-rated media has become: sensationalistic, attention-grabbing fluff that titillates without stimulating further thought. Cotton-candy journalism. Selective, at that, and under the control of certain people who only want you to hear their "news", and only if it fits their worldview.

That was the baby in his message.

The bathwater was all of the other personal, unsubstantiated innuendo in that post.

-copro

Exactly. For the record, I'm not trying to bring Copro in on this, on "my side". But, this is the main point. Especially about "underhanded" techniques that are often employed when someone gets in the way of an existing power structure.

That being said, I'm prepared to go alone on this one.

 

[deleted126335]

"anti-Semite" the oldest trick in the book.

Does my opposition to continued Israeli settlements on Palestinian land make me an "anti-Semite". That term has been SO overused that, truly, it no longer carries weight.

And, for the other people on this forum, who's opinion I do care, would an anti-Semite be an active, verifiable, member of a pro-Israel (though not the kind that AIPAC would like) group like this? http://www.jstreet.org/

So, lay off the slander a.shole.

I just don't want the U.S. to allow AIPAC to pressure our forces into "taking out" Iran. I don't want the U.S. to have anything to do with another trumped up charge against another country that will cause US billions of $$, kill perhaps hundreds of thousands of innocent people, put our service men and women in harms way, and multiply America's enemies tenfold. Yet, you try to silence the debate by calling me "anti-Semitic". You're a joke.

The sub thread was on what is happening to America. Unprompted, You bring up the ADL, Israeli settlements, Mortimer Zuckerman, The holocaust museum, a Jewish anti-Israeli author, AIPAC. Since my last post you post three responses, you are itching for a debate on something that you have obviously spent a fair amount of time researching. Sounds like you think about Jews and/or Israel a whole lot.

 

[mille125]

The sub thread was on what is happening to America. Unprompted, You bring up the ADL, Israeli settlements, Mortimer Zuckerman, The holocaust museum, a Jewish anti-Israeli author, AIPAC. Since my last post you post three responses, you are itching for a debate on something that you have obviously spent a fair amount of time researching. Sounds like you think about Jews and/or Israel a whole lot.

As an impartial observer, I must say that I do not feel that David's post are particularly antisemitic. Dr. Doze has appeared to take a rather literal interpretation of some of his "facts". However, I must also say that the timing and volume of the israel/jewish references in the setting of his thread are quite peculiar and obviously attempt to elicit a response.

 

[cfdavid]

The sub thread was on what is happening to America. Unprompted, You bring up the ADL, Israeli settlements, Mortimer Zuckerman, The holocaust museum, a Jewish anti-Israeli author, AIPAC. Since my last post you post three responses, you are itching for a debate on something that you have obviously spent a fair amount of time researching. Sounds like you think about Jews and/or Israel a whole lot.

No doze, I really don't think about this stuff that much. I am somewhat politically active, and I do read from multiple sources that I feel can be less biased on certain issues. Like I've stated, as a non-Jew, I've been a member of http://www.jstreet.org/about/about-us

The above link is what I'm FOR. I've participated in most of their campagns since a few months after their founding (they're a new group).

You can speculate all you want as to what I'm against. Just don't get all trigger happy with "anti-Semite". That's a serious acquisation. And, I AM against misinformation and intentional disinformation that is prevalent in our news media.

I'm also against any forces that are very actively agitating and advocating the UNITED STATES to bomb Iran. I've already stated why I feel this way. And to Mille's point, this topic, and specifically the agitators behind such initiatives is not often taken up by the U.S. press corp. But, it's a fact that groups like AIPAC are actively lobbying for military intervention in Iran, which would be catastrophic for peace in the Middle East (in general) and to the U.S. in particular.

So, sure, perhaps I've used this example as an invitation to discuss mis/disinformation and as an example of the often one way viewpoint we regularly see in our media. The rhetoric has settled down a bit lately, but for awhile, it looked like we really were going to, literally, go bomb Iran. And, it's easy to prove who the agitators for this action are. If many happen to be ardent Zionist extremist, then so be it. Let's call a spade a spade.

As for YOUR preoccupation with the above organizations and people, you either 1) took my advice and looked them up, or 2) have spent quite a bit of time yourself being "preoccupied" with this issue.

 

[cfdavid]

The sub thread was on what is happening to America. Unprompted, You bring up the ADL, Israeli settlements, Mortimer Zuckerman, The holocaust museum, a Jewish anti-Israeli author, AIPAC. Since my last post you post three responses, you are itching for a debate on something that you have obviously spent a fair amount of time researching. Sounds like you think about Jews and/or Israel a whole lot.

No doze, I really don't think about this stuff that much. I am somewhat politically active, and I do read from multiple sources that I feel can be less biased on certain issues. Like I've stated, as a non-Jew, I've been a member of http://www.jstreet.org/about/about-us

The above link is what I'm FOR. I've participated in most of their campagns since a few months after their founding (they're a new group).

You can speculate all you want as to what I'm against. Just don't get all trigger happy with "anti-Semite". That's a serious accusation, and I excpect an apology. And, I AM against misinformation and intentional disinformation that is prevalent in our news media.

I'm also against any forces that are very actively agitating and advocating the UNITED STATES to bomb Iran. I've already stated why I feel this way. And to Mille's point, this topic, and specifically the agitators behind such initiatives is not often taken up by the U.S. press corp. But, it's a fact that groups like AIPAC are actively lobbying for military intervention in Iran, which would be catastrophic for peace in the Middle East (in general) and to the U.S. in particular. (which is mostly why I care, but also because it effects a large part of the world, and millions of other people as well). In fact, I can't think of a more catastrophic event that is more likely (though unlikely at this point, I THINK) in the world today, and more preventable (unlike a natural disaster for example).

So, sure, perhaps I've used this example as an invitation to discuss mis/disinformation and as an example of the often one way viewpoint we regularly see in our media. The rhetoric has settled down a bit lately, but for awhile, it looked like we really were going to, literally, go bomb Iran. And, it's easy to prove who the agitators for this action are. If many happen to be ardent Zionist extremists, then so be it.

As for YOUR preoccupation with the above organizations and people, you either 1) took my advice and looked them up (at record speed I might add), or 2) have spent quite a bit of time yourself being "preoccupied" with this issue.

Then again, it took you all but 20 minutes to read my thread, call me an anti-Semite, and bring forth the statement that Rupert Murdoch is not Jewish, so I suspect #2 is more likely in your case Doze...... You seem to be very well informed as well on this issue.

So, that being said, perhaps you've proven at least one of my points. That is, that when you go up against a powerful group of people, and differ in your ideology from THEIR point of view, the gloves really do come off and often in an "underhanded" way, such as labeling people as anti-Semites in an attempt to END all discussion on that issue.

 

[coprolalia]

Exactly. For the record, I'm not trying to bring Copro in on this, on "my side". But, this is the main point. Especially about "underhanded" techniques that are often employed when someone gets in the way of an existing power structure.

That being said, I'm prepared to go alone on this one.

The only "side" I'm on is my own. If you happen to agree with me on something, bully for you. Otherwise, I care very little what you (and every other poster on this forum) thinks or believes. If you happen (by mistake or happenstance or otherwise) to say something relevant, germane, intelligent, important, cogent, or interesting, I'll let you know. Don't ever then broaden that to a blanket endorsement of your personal belief system, though. Because, chances are, you're going to assume too much. And, in the end, you're probably going to be nothing more than grossly mistaken.

Just for the record...

-copro

 

[cfdavid]

The only "side" I'm on is my own. If you happen to agree with me on something, bully for you. Otherwise, I care very little what you (and every other poster on this forum) thinks or believes. If you happen (by mistake or happenstance or otherwise) to say something relevant, germane, intelligent, important, cogent, or interesting, I'll let you know. Don't ever then broaden that to a blanket endorsement of your personal belief system, though. Because, chances are, you're going to assume too much. And, in the end, you're probably going to be nothing more than grossly mistaken.

Just for the record...

-copro

That's exactly why I tried to clarify the way I did. I think I know your style by now. I wouldn't make such an assumption.

Now, I'm gonna chill for a bit. Maybe sip on a nice Scotch after finishing up one of the more rigorous rotations of 4th year.....

I hope everyone has a nice weekend.

cf

 

[deleted126335]

No doze, I really don't think about this stuff that much. I am somewhat politically active, and I do read from multiple sources that I feel can be less biased on certain issues. Like I've stated, as a non-Jew, I've been a member of http://www.jstreet.org/about/about-us

The above link is what I'm FOR. I've participated in most of their campagns since a few months after their founding (they're a new group).

You can speculate all you want as to what I'm against. Just don't get all trigger happy with "anti-Semite". That's a serious accusation, and I excpect an apology. And, I AM against misinformation and intentional disinformation that is prevalent in our news media.

I'm also against any forces that are very actively agitating and advocating the UNITED STATES to bomb Iran. I've already stated why I feel this way. And to Mille's point, this topic, and specifically the agitators behind such initiatives is not often taken up by the U.S. press corp. But, it's a fact that groups like AIPAC are actively lobbying for military intervention in Iran, which would be catastrophic for peace in the Middle East (in general) and to the U.S. in particular. (which is mostly why I care, but also because it effects a large part of the world, and millions of other people as well). In fact, I can't think of a more catastrophic event that is more likely (though unlikely at this point, I THINK) in the world today, and more preventable (unlike a natural disaster for example).

So, sure, perhaps I've used this example as an invitation to discuss mis/disinformation and as an example of the often one way viewpoint we regularly see in our media. The rhetoric has settled down a bit lately, but for awhile, it looked like we really were going to, literally, go bomb Iran. And, it's easy to prove who the agitators for this action are. If many happen to be ardent Zionist extremists, then so be it.

As for YOUR preoccupation with the above organizations and people, you either 1) took my advice and looked them up (at record speed I might add), or 2) have spent quite a bit of time yourself being "preoccupied" with this issue.

Then again, it took you all but 20 minutes to read my thread, call me an anti-Semite, and bring forth the statement that Rupert Murdoch is not Jewish, so I suspect #2 is more likely in your case Doze...... You seem to be very well informed as well on this issue.

So, that being said, perhaps you've proven at least one of my points. That is, that when you go up against a powerful group of people, and differ in your ideology from THEIR point of view, the gloves really do come off and often in an "underhanded" way, such as labeling people as anti-Semites in an attempt to END all discussion on that issue.

I think that you are full of crap. No apology.

 

[2win]

Barcelona, to be precise. I've been there a few times, and the women are all thin and beautiful.

Like I've said before, if Obama is successful in "downgrading" us to Europe, I'm going there. Permanently.

-copro

Barcelona is my favorite place in Europe. Hey Cop - maybe we'll be colleagues - just be sure that they'll recognize your diploma. Awesome place!!!

 

[cfdavid]

I think that you are full of crap. No apology.

Well then I won't rescind my statement that you are clearly a joke.

You haven't lent anything intellectual to this discussion other than calling names on an annonymous forum (which I suspect is the only way a guy like you would have the stones to call names).

I obviously pissed you off to the point where you threw out the dreaded "anti-Semite" (again, a serious accusation). Yet, you haven't made any attempt to prove wrong any of the points I've made. Why not? You seem very well informed on those issues.

 

[notinkansas]

I think many factors have played a role. Basically our society has an expoentially decreasing population of people who think for themselves and take responsibility for their own actions. Haven't we witnessed that medical students in general have much more of an entitlement mentality than they used to?

When politicians strive to stay in power by buying votes (ie promising "free" goodies to voters) they create, over time, a massive amount of people who look to the government to solve every problem.

Combined with a marketing effort (ie you tube videos), rather than campaigning on the issues, this produces people who support a candidate who's hip and popular, rather than provides real solutions to real problems.

We also now have a generation of pseudo-adults, who were "parented" by helicopter parents- protecting their children from any adverse life event by a thick layer of bubble wrap. The scary thing is that these people, who have never made an independent decision in their lives, are now allowed to vote.

A culture of political correctness made it very difficult to come out against Obama. Criticize and you'll be accused of racism. Years of affirmative action have taught us that race is a more important factor in getting a job than the ability to actually do the job. Remember a large number of people who have never voted before turned out to vote for him simply because of his race.

Also factor in that today's college students think they should get a B in class just for showing up. These are the kids who "played" sports in their earlier years in which score wasn't kept, there were no tryouts, everybody played equally regardless of skill and everybody got a trophy.

No wonder our society elected a president who isn't qualified, has never been in charge of anything, and has associations with some downright scary people. After all, it's about time America had a black (sorry, African-American) president. Anybody who is against him is racist. He just wants everybody to be equal.... to achieve utopia. And why shouldn't he get a prize for just showing up? To expect him to achieve something before being awarded a prize is unreasonable. And perhaps racist.

 

[pgg]

A culture of political correctness made it very difficult to come out against Obama. Criticize and you'll be accused of racism.

You know, I'm really getting sick of this kind of childish bull**** whining. Don't be such a crybaby. No one's calling you a racist, and even if they did, why do you care what such a mental midget says anyway?

I've known many people to be very critical of Obama, and NOT ONCE have I EVER heard their criticisms dismissed as racism.

Who, exactly, is being accused of racism? Who's being censored by the all-powerful librul media? Who?

Closest I can think of are Beck and Limbaugh, and those two still have their (very successful) shows. They're doing just fine.

I can't believe you actually think it's "difficult to come out against Obama" ... half the country (give or take) is against Obama, the % is rising, and again I can't remember a single instance in which anyone I know was accused of being a racist for speaking out against Obama's agenda.

Get a grip. No one's persecuting you.

 

[Idiopathic]

thank you all for reminding me why i dont come in these threads

 

[WholeLottaGame7]

You know, I'm really getting sick of this kind of childish bull**** whining. Don't be such a crybaby. No one's calling you a racist, and even if they did, why do you care what such a mental midget says anyway?

I've known many people to be very critical of Obama, and NOT ONCE have I EVER heard their criticisms dismissed as racism.

Who, exactly, is being accused of racism? Who's being censored by the all-powerful librul media? Who?

Closest I can think of are Beck and Limbaugh, and those two still have their (very successful) shows. They're doing just fine.

I can't believe you actually think it's "difficult to come out against Obama" ... half the country (give or take) is against Obama, the % is rising, and again I can't remember a single instance in which anyone I know was accused of being a racist for speaking out against Obama's agenda.

Get a grip. No one's persecuting you.

I came to the conclusion a long time ago that some people just like to b**** and moan, and if there's nothing to b**** and moan about, they'll make something up. That's what's so great about politics, you can always come up with something. I agree with pgg, I think I'd stick to policy issues and not race issues; I think fear of the racism card has just been drilled into conservatives (originally rightfully so), but now doesn't carry nearly so much weight.

Unless you're arguing that Obama is a terrible President because he's black (which personally I have yet to hear), I think you're OK. Criticizing his decisions or policies most definitely does not constitute racism in any sense of the word.

On a related note, I LOVE when people (Democrats and Republicans) who SWEAR they are going to Canada or country X in Europe if politician Y wins again or if Z law is passed. How many of them actually do? About 0%. It just so happens it's more ironic when it's Republicans making the threat, especially in regards to health care reform.