Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Latest Change of Course by Bush in Iraq
- Thread starter ajwps
- Start date
5stringJeff
Senior Member
Originally posted by dijetlo
Very salient, jeff. The dems lack a message, an over-arching agenda that would help them capture the independants who decide presidential elections, but on the other hand, so do the Republicans. Either party is little more than a tool of the moneyed interests that fund it and I think america might be becoming aware of that, so how that will effect the election is anyones guess. Right now the best the Dems can do is the WAB party (We aint Bush). I doubt it will carry them to the Whitehouse, but it might be enough to shift the congress/senate.
Happy Thanksgiving, Dude.
Dijetlo,
Hope your Thanksgiving was good.
I agree 1000% that the Dems lack a message, except that they aren't Bush. However, even though his numbers are slipping, people still like Bush. I don't think that "We Hate Bush" is going to lift the Dems numbers anywhere, though it might get their base worked up.
As far as money goes... I think that GWB has principles and will stand by them. That said, one can look at his fundraising so far and see that the majority of his money comes from small-time donors who give less than $100 each. (I don't remember the exact numbers, but I think it's 57%.) Meanwhile, the Dems are skirting the new CFR laws by setting up a bunch of "non-partisan," quasi-DNC organizations that will put out the Dem's message - with unlimited soft money. I'm not saying that the Right has nothing of the sort (the NRA comes to mind), but the Left seems to be setting these up like they were going out of style.
My take is that the Dems have yet to show any reasons why people should vote for them - only why they think people should vote against Bush.
D
dijetlo
Guest
Originally posted by gop_jeff
Dijetlo, Hope your Thanksgiving was good.
Excellent, I hope the same is true for you and yours.
True, but it's early, they don't even have a candidate yet. The single advantage of being the loyal opposition party is the ability to snipe from a distance, I doubt they will give that up, especially since GWBs' support appears weakest on Iraq, so watch for them to continue the offensive.
My take is that the Dems have yet to show any reasons why people should vote for them - only why they think people should vote against Bush.
As for the money, Bush has his own quasi-groups, as you were kind enough to mention. It is the new playing field of campaign reform. I, for one, am not impressed at this early stage.
green lantern
Member
hey aj, couldnt agree with you more. 
DKSuddeth
Senior Member
Picturing George Bush as an Andrew Jackson and then painting him with the favor of americans with the following sentences -
What does this say about the american people and how little we've traveled as a part of the human race?
I look back on the pathetic american history classes that I was taught in junior high and high school and realize that its probably not much different than propaganda class designed to instill an 'american loyalty' among its children.
I had to dig into the little known volumes of books on early american history to get a feel for what really happened, like the 1830 Indian removal act and the extremely callous way that early european settlers treated the native americans. Chief among them being Andrew Jackson.
If a 'jacksonian image' is how we wish to picture our current president, i ask again, how little does that say for us as americans who pretend to be freedom loving people?
Jackson, a man of dubious literacy, paused for a moment and then remarked for the ages, "Damn Grotius! Damn Pufendorf! Damn Vattell!"
It was a strategic retort, designed to show that he was not the kind of man who would let the law get in the way of a war. He was a man who acted first and thought later. Here was a man for America.
Sure enough, Adams notwithstanding, the United States couldn't have identified more with Jackson's instinctual, as opposed to reasoned, justification for slaughtering the Seminoles -- and it helped ensure his election.
-We haven't matured much. There's something eerily Jacksonian about our current commander in chief, a man who also favors instinct over principle.
What does this say about the american people and how little we've traveled as a part of the human race?
I look back on the pathetic american history classes that I was taught in junior high and high school and realize that its probably not much different than propaganda class designed to instill an 'american loyalty' among its children.
I had to dig into the little known volumes of books on early american history to get a feel for what really happened, like the 1830 Indian removal act and the extremely callous way that early european settlers treated the native americans. Chief among them being Andrew Jackson.
If a 'jacksonian image' is how we wish to picture our current president, i ask again, how little does that say for us as americans who pretend to be freedom loving people?
ajwps
Active Member
- Thread starter
- #47
Originally posted by DKSuddeth
What does this say about the american people and how little we've traveled as a part of the human race?"
It has a great deal to say concerning the American people being actually a part of the human race. You words seem to support a dictatorship of the proletariat because of this inherent human weakness to act for not only self-interest but for the morality of a mainly free nation. Sometimes what the 'elite' self-righteous left feel is right for the ignorant American population, is proof that these humans are traveling to an end to western civilization. Just take a look at the so-called Communist countries and for their most recent demise. (i.e., Ayn Rand) You would have this for the American people because of loyalty and allegiance to these concepts
"I look back on the pathetic american history classes that I was taught in junior high and high school and realize that its probably not much different than propaganda class designed to instill an 'american loyalty' among its children."
Luckily you live in a free society where you can espouse your aberrant ideas in a public forum without being shot to death by the 'left elite' thinkers and their 'newspeak' control of a BETTER civilization. Maybe you would like to have been taught the ideas and concepts of Carl Marx and Fredrick Engel in your junior and senior high school courses?
I note that you did not mention your college education in which most probably these utopian world concepts were drilled into your sponge brain ready to absorb an education. Maybe your American school teaching should have propagandized a totalitarian form of government. You are definitely a profound thinker.
"I had to dig into the little known volumes of books on early american history to get a feel for what really happened, like the 1830 Indian removal act and the extremely callous way that early european settlers treated the native americans. Chief among them being Andrew Jackson."
So you dug into little known volumes of American history books to find that your country and its people being less civilized and really human afterall. Which society has now evolved into a not so perfect system but based on a higher level of equality, justice and freedom? If not the case then you will have to give me an example of a better society anywhere in the world.
"If a 'jacksonian image' is how we wish to picture our current president, i ask again, how little does that say for us as americans who pretend to be freedom loving people?"
So you find Andrew Jackson to be just another flawed human who turned out to be one of the few really great men with insight into a society which had never been conceived before in the history of mankind? I would much rather have a flawed but morally and insightful correct leader who takes bold initiatives rather than a 'perfect' president superman utopian who would be unhampered by any human concept of right or wrong but all knowing and without the blemish of being a human being.
vs.
What does this say about the american people and how little we've traveled as a part of the human race?"
It has a great deal to say concerning the American people being actually a part of the human race. You words seem to support a dictatorship of the proletariat because of this inherent human weakness to act for not only self-interest but for the morality of a mainly free nation. Sometimes what the 'elite' self-righteous left feel is right for the ignorant American population, is proof that these humans are traveling to an end to western civilization. Just take a look at the so-called Communist countries and for their most recent demise. (i.e., Ayn Rand) You would have this for the American people because of loyalty and allegiance to these concepts
"I look back on the pathetic american history classes that I was taught in junior high and high school and realize that its probably not much different than propaganda class designed to instill an 'american loyalty' among its children."
Luckily you live in a free society where you can espouse your aberrant ideas in a public forum without being shot to death by the 'left elite' thinkers and their 'newspeak' control of a BETTER civilization. Maybe you would like to have been taught the ideas and concepts of Carl Marx and Fredrick Engel in your junior and senior high school courses?
I note that you did not mention your college education in which most probably these utopian world concepts were drilled into your sponge brain ready to absorb an education. Maybe your American school teaching should have propagandized a totalitarian form of government. You are definitely a profound thinker.
"I had to dig into the little known volumes of books on early american history to get a feel for what really happened, like the 1830 Indian removal act and the extremely callous way that early european settlers treated the native americans. Chief among them being Andrew Jackson."
So you dug into little known volumes of American history books to find that your country and its people being less civilized and really human afterall. Which society has now evolved into a not so perfect system but based on a higher level of equality, justice and freedom? If not the case then you will have to give me an example of a better society anywhere in the world.
"If a 'jacksonian image' is how we wish to picture our current president, i ask again, how little does that say for us as americans who pretend to be freedom loving people?"
So you find Andrew Jackson to be just another flawed human who turned out to be one of the few really great men with insight into a society which had never been conceived before in the history of mankind? I would much rather have a flawed but morally and insightful correct leader who takes bold initiatives rather than a 'perfect' president superman utopian who would be unhampered by any human concept of right or wrong but all knowing and without the blemish of being a human being.
The proletariat is that class in society which lives entirely from the sale of its labor and does not draw profit from any kind of capital; whose weal and woe, whose life and death, whose sole existence depends on the demand for labor -- hence, on the changing state of business, on the vagaries of unbridled competition. The proletariat, or the class of proletarians, is, in a word, the working class of the 19th century.
Attribution: Fredrick Engels
vs.
To preserve the freedom of the human mind and freedom of the press, every spirit should be ready to devote itself to martyrdom; for as long as we may think as we will, and speak as we think the condition of man will proceed in improvement. The generation which is going off the stage has deserved well of mankind for the struggles it has made, and for having arrested the course of despotism which had overwhelmed the world for thousands and thousands of years. If there seems to be danger that the ground they have gained will be lost again, that danger comes from the generation your contemporary. But that the enthusiasm which characterizes youth should lift its parricide hands against freedom and science would be such a monstrous phenomenon as I cannot place among possible things in this age and country.
ATTRIBUTION: THOMAS JEFFERSON
DKSuddeth
Senior Member
aj, is it your complete inability to comprehend the simple english language or is it your incessant desire to paint your ideology as that of 'I'm right, therefore those who believe differently are wrong'?
My posting had nothing to do with 'proletariatism' or communism. It had entirely to deal with the author of an editorial painting our current president, and the majority of the american people, as an unevolving and ever war like people with no hope of progressing into a truly peaceful people.
what would be 'aberrant'? anything YOU don't agree with? Might I remind you that the 'right elite' is also quite capable of 'newspeak' and have shown themselves to do just that as recently as this year. Maybe YOU should take some comprehension classes because once again you've taken my words and turned them into something YOU want to believe they say. Again, is that because you can't comprehend anyone NOT thinking the same as YOU do? I never brought Marx or Engel into my thouhts.
I didn't mention it because its not important and its irrelevant. If you MUST know, my post high school education was a 6 year degree courtesy of uncle sam and the marine corps where I learned how to be a rifleman and an air traffic controller in the defense of this nation. I would say that this probably makes me a more profound thinker than you since I didn't have to deal with a programmed line of thinking in terms of a planned college curriculum. I was taught to think and act on my feet with split second precision or people died.
You either continue to be ignorant and are missing my point or you are being obtuse and are refusing to admit that you see my point. Is american history nothing more than what is taught in schools? Should we accept that the only history that matters is the one they want us to read and learn? It takes a 'profound thinker' to reach beyond ones teachings and learn more about the true history than to accept whats taught in academics. To re-iterate what my point was, Have the american people come so little in their progress that they want to still identify themselves with a people that cared nothing about the well-being of another culture? That its still OK to barter with one hand and steal with the other? If you state that we've made progress in our society by maintaining an early 1800's ideology then that surely speaks volumes for what you consider 'progress'.
I find Andrew Jackson to be another typical politician who turned out to be nothing more than someone who could release any principles he might have had to continue to stay in power. As for being a 'great man' with insight into a great society, I'd say he lost that vision by arresting those that disagreed with him, supressing opposition with violence, and abandoning the rule of law to maintain a powerful position in pursuit of a self serving interest. In other words, he was a despot.
Whose morals and insight should we accept? What bold initiatives should be accepted and should they be without some sort of foresight? Should anyone who takes bold initiatives be forgiven any wrongs that may be done simply because they were bold? To answer any of these questions honestly would mean that we, as a society, must progress further than we have and until we do, nothing of the sort of 'peace' we'd like to see will ever happen.
My posting had nothing to do with 'proletariatism' or communism. It had entirely to deal with the author of an editorial painting our current president, and the majority of the american people, as an unevolving and ever war like people with no hope of progressing into a truly peaceful people.
Luckily you live in a free society where you can espouse your aberrant ideas in a public forum without being shot to death by the 'left elite' thinkers and their 'newspeak' control of a BETTER civilization. Maybe you would like to have been taught the ideas and concepts of Carl Marx and Fredrick Engel in your junior and senior high school courses?
what would be 'aberrant'? anything YOU don't agree with? Might I remind you that the 'right elite' is also quite capable of 'newspeak' and have shown themselves to do just that as recently as this year. Maybe YOU should take some comprehension classes because once again you've taken my words and turned them into something YOU want to believe they say. Again, is that because you can't comprehend anyone NOT thinking the same as YOU do? I never brought Marx or Engel into my thouhts.
I note that you did not mention your college education in which most probably these utopian world concepts were drilled into your sponge brain ready to absorb an education.
I didn't mention it because its not important and its irrelevant. If you MUST know, my post high school education was a 6 year degree courtesy of uncle sam and the marine corps where I learned how to be a rifleman and an air traffic controller in the defense of this nation. I would say that this probably makes me a more profound thinker than you since I didn't have to deal with a programmed line of thinking in terms of a planned college curriculum. I was taught to think and act on my feet with split second precision or people died.
So you dug into little known volumes of American history books to find that your country and its people being less civilized and really human afterall. Which society has now evolved into a not so perfect system but based on a higher level of equality, justice and freedom? If not the case then you will have to give me an example of a better society anywhere in the world.
You either continue to be ignorant and are missing my point or you are being obtuse and are refusing to admit that you see my point. Is american history nothing more than what is taught in schools? Should we accept that the only history that matters is the one they want us to read and learn? It takes a 'profound thinker' to reach beyond ones teachings and learn more about the true history than to accept whats taught in academics. To re-iterate what my point was, Have the american people come so little in their progress that they want to still identify themselves with a people that cared nothing about the well-being of another culture? That its still OK to barter with one hand and steal with the other? If you state that we've made progress in our society by maintaining an early 1800's ideology then that surely speaks volumes for what you consider 'progress'.
So you find Andrew Jackson to be just another flawed human who turned out to be one of the few really great men with insight into a society which had never been conceived before in the history of mankind?
I find Andrew Jackson to be another typical politician who turned out to be nothing more than someone who could release any principles he might have had to continue to stay in power. As for being a 'great man' with insight into a great society, I'd say he lost that vision by arresting those that disagreed with him, supressing opposition with violence, and abandoning the rule of law to maintain a powerful position in pursuit of a self serving interest. In other words, he was a despot.
I would much rather have a flawed but morally and insightful correct leader who takes bold initiatives rather than a 'perfect' president superman utopian who would be unhampered by any human concept of right or wrong but all knowing and without the blemish of being a human being.
Whose morals and insight should we accept? What bold initiatives should be accepted and should they be without some sort of foresight? Should anyone who takes bold initiatives be forgiven any wrongs that may be done simply because they were bold? To answer any of these questions honestly would mean that we, as a society, must progress further than we have and until we do, nothing of the sort of 'peace' we'd like to see will ever happen.
Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself. ~Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy
Past the seeker as he prayed came the crippled and the beggar and the beaten. And seeing them... he cried, "Great God, how is it that a loving creator can see such things and yet do nothing about them?" God said, "I did do something. I made you." ~Author Unknown
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. ~Mahatma Ghandi
ajwps
Active Member
- Thread starter
- #49
"aj, is it your complete inability to comprehend the simple english language or is it your incessant desire to paint your ideology as that of 'I'm right, therefore those who believe differently are wrong'?"
There appears to be some confusion as to which of us seems completely unable to comprehend the equivalency of same concepts posted in the English language. Apparently you do not find your own ideology to be subject to question and no amount of debate necessary.
"My posting had nothing to do with 'proletariatism' or communism. It had entirely to deal with the author of an editorial painting our current president, and the majority of the american people, as an unevolving and ever war like people with no hope of progressing into a truly peaceful people."
You supply a perfect example of your attempts to confuse the difference between red apples and red apples. Your references give little credit to our current president and the majority of Americans vs. a single minded utopia whereby human faults are seen to be devolving and unable to 'evolve' into truly peaceful utopian people. Your antiquated concepts of reality have long ago been seen for what they are; nothing more than a loss from reality.
"what would be 'aberrant'? anything YOU don't agree with?"
Aberrant concepts are those that are anomalous to available evidence to the contrary from the perspective of history. My point of view is also subject to change by valid debate or proofs to the contrary. But your ideation of an irrational and irresponsible president leading those ordinary American people away from an unrealistic peaceful and acceptable outcome. This is the nature of this war against terrorism.
"Might I remind you that the 'right elite' is also quite capable of 'newspeak' and have shown themselves to do just that as recently as this year. Maybe YOU should take some comprehension classes because once again you've taken my words and turned them into something YOU want to believe they say."
Good point. I never said that the 'right elite' is without fault. The unnecessary repetition of one's ability to comprehend another's concepts is singularly futile. It also might be that your understanding of your points are only understood by yourself and you find others incapable of understanding.
"Again, is that because you can't comprehend anyone NOT thinking the same as YOU do? I never brought Marx or Engel into my thoughts."
You didn't need to use the names of Marx or Engel as your thoughts and ideations seem to espouse like beliefs and actions in your reference to our president and his leading the American people away from a 'peaceful' end to their way of life in this land of loyalty and allegiance. To a very unique way of dealing with each other in a modern western civilization.
"I didn't mention it because its not important and its irrelevant. If you MUST know, my post high school education was a 6 year degree courtesy of uncle sam and the marine corps where I learned how to be a rifleman and an air traffic controller in the defense of this nation. I would say that this probably makes me a more profound thinker than you since I didn't have to deal with a programmed line of thinking in terms of a planned college curriculum. I was taught to think and act on my feet with split second precision or people died."
What you think is unimportant or irrelevant might just be very telling of your seemingly aberrant thoughts. It is very admirable with your military service to Uncle Sam and government air traffic control services but do you understand that there are some military and civil servants who find their way of life untenable? Some even find it in their conscious to become a traitor to their benefactors. I do not accuse you of any such thing but your words could lead others to believe that you are not satisfied with a society in which allows you the freedom to express your feelings of disrespect for an exigent president who was elected by the people to lead them in time of peril.
"You either continue to be ignorant and are missing my point or you are being obtuse and are refusing to admit that you see my point. Is american history nothing more than what is taught in schools? Should we accept that the only history that matters is the one they want us to read and learn? It takes a 'profound thinker' to reach beyond ones teachings and learn more about the true history than to accept whats taught in academics. To re-iterate what my point was, Have the american people come so little in their progress that they want to still identify themselves with a people that cared nothing about the well-being of another culture? That its still OK to barter with one hand and steal with the other? If you state that we've made progress in our society by maintaining an early 1800's ideology then that surely speaks volumes for what you consider 'progress'."
You continue to find others ignorant while keeping yourself aloof in your own perceived brilliance. How revealing of your brilliant thoughts when you find me of ".... being obtuse and are refusing to admit that you see my point. " Yes you are correct in your assessment of my obtuseness. You are also a very funny guy in that you seem to have some mystic ability to find a very different American history not authenticated by documented records or archeological history of our rather new nation.
"I find Andrew Jackson to be another typical politician who turned out to be nothing more than someone who could release any principles he might have had to continue to stay in power. As for being a 'great man' with insight into a great society, I'd say he lost that vision by arresting those that disagreed with him, suppressing opposition with violence, and abandoning the rule of law to maintain a powerful position in pursuit of a self serving interest. In other words, he was a despot."
Your finding of Andrew Jackson to be another typical politician seems to be consistent with your peculiar ideations.
Andrew Johnson, Democrat Vice President, became president after the assassination of Republican Abraham Lincoln. His only crimes were public drunkenness and using his decision making power as president to reunite the United States after the civil war. "Moves were made to begin Impeachment proceedings against Johnson. But these efforts were still not strong enough and they floundered. However, the Presidents alleged violation of the Tenure Act would resurrect the Impeachment move. The Tenure Act prohibited the President from removing from office any officials whose appointment required Senate approval. On February 21, 1868, however, Johnson did exactly that to his Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton. An impeachment hearing was inevitable but failed.
But this history is well documented with written record and illustrates the character of President Johnson thereby subjecting him to your revision of history by your apparent mystic powers to understand a different president who lost his "vision by arresting those that disagreed with him, suppressing opposition with violence, and abandoning the rule of law to maintain a powerful position in pursuit of a self serving interest."
"Whose morals and insight should we accept?"
Those whose morals were laid down by the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence for the benefit those citizens. IOW those characterizes of western civilization.
"What bold initiatives should be accepted and should they be without some sort of foresight? Should anyone who takes bold initiatives be forgiven any wrongs that may be done simply because they were bold? To answer any of these questions honestly would mean that we, as a society, must progress further than we have and until we do, nothing of the sort of 'peace' we'd like to see will ever happen."
No one says that any politician or president be forgiven for taking bold initiatives in order to keep their oath of office to the American people. Democratic President Harry S. Truman also took bold initiative instead of poll taking to decide the fate of millions. To this day, many do not forgive him for opening a Pandora s Box which terminated a war that saved millions of lives.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself. ~Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What is your point in this quotation from Tolstoy?
"quote:
Past the seeker as he prayed came the crippled and the beggar and the beaten. And seeing them... he cried, "Great God, how is it that a loving creator can see such things and yet do nothing about them?" God said, "I did do something. I made you." ~Author Unknown
You are using a citation of the concept of 'freewill' not being directed for human good by an unknowable Creator who allows bad things to happen to good people and good things happen to those who are evil. What is your point?
"Quote:
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. ~Mahatma Ghandi"
There appears to be some confusion as to which of us seems completely unable to comprehend the equivalency of same concepts posted in the English language. Apparently you do not find your own ideology to be subject to question and no amount of debate necessary.
"My posting had nothing to do with 'proletariatism' or communism. It had entirely to deal with the author of an editorial painting our current president, and the majority of the american people, as an unevolving and ever war like people with no hope of progressing into a truly peaceful people."
You supply a perfect example of your attempts to confuse the difference between red apples and red apples. Your references give little credit to our current president and the majority of Americans vs. a single minded utopia whereby human faults are seen to be devolving and unable to 'evolve' into truly peaceful utopian people. Your antiquated concepts of reality have long ago been seen for what they are; nothing more than a loss from reality.
"what would be 'aberrant'? anything YOU don't agree with?"
Aberrant concepts are those that are anomalous to available evidence to the contrary from the perspective of history. My point of view is also subject to change by valid debate or proofs to the contrary. But your ideation of an irrational and irresponsible president leading those ordinary American people away from an unrealistic peaceful and acceptable outcome. This is the nature of this war against terrorism.
"Might I remind you that the 'right elite' is also quite capable of 'newspeak' and have shown themselves to do just that as recently as this year. Maybe YOU should take some comprehension classes because once again you've taken my words and turned them into something YOU want to believe they say."
Good point. I never said that the 'right elite' is without fault. The unnecessary repetition of one's ability to comprehend another's concepts is singularly futile. It also might be that your understanding of your points are only understood by yourself and you find others incapable of understanding.
"Again, is that because you can't comprehend anyone NOT thinking the same as YOU do? I never brought Marx or Engel into my thoughts."
You didn't need to use the names of Marx or Engel as your thoughts and ideations seem to espouse like beliefs and actions in your reference to our president and his leading the American people away from a 'peaceful' end to their way of life in this land of loyalty and allegiance. To a very unique way of dealing with each other in a modern western civilization.
"I didn't mention it because its not important and its irrelevant. If you MUST know, my post high school education was a 6 year degree courtesy of uncle sam and the marine corps where I learned how to be a rifleman and an air traffic controller in the defense of this nation. I would say that this probably makes me a more profound thinker than you since I didn't have to deal with a programmed line of thinking in terms of a planned college curriculum. I was taught to think and act on my feet with split second precision or people died."
What you think is unimportant or irrelevant might just be very telling of your seemingly aberrant thoughts. It is very admirable with your military service to Uncle Sam and government air traffic control services but do you understand that there are some military and civil servants who find their way of life untenable? Some even find it in their conscious to become a traitor to their benefactors. I do not accuse you of any such thing but your words could lead others to believe that you are not satisfied with a society in which allows you the freedom to express your feelings of disrespect for an exigent president who was elected by the people to lead them in time of peril.
"You either continue to be ignorant and are missing my point or you are being obtuse and are refusing to admit that you see my point. Is american history nothing more than what is taught in schools? Should we accept that the only history that matters is the one they want us to read and learn? It takes a 'profound thinker' to reach beyond ones teachings and learn more about the true history than to accept whats taught in academics. To re-iterate what my point was, Have the american people come so little in their progress that they want to still identify themselves with a people that cared nothing about the well-being of another culture? That its still OK to barter with one hand and steal with the other? If you state that we've made progress in our society by maintaining an early 1800's ideology then that surely speaks volumes for what you consider 'progress'."
You continue to find others ignorant while keeping yourself aloof in your own perceived brilliance. How revealing of your brilliant thoughts when you find me of ".... being obtuse and are refusing to admit that you see my point. " Yes you are correct in your assessment of my obtuseness. You are also a very funny guy in that you seem to have some mystic ability to find a very different American history not authenticated by documented records or archeological history of our rather new nation.
"I find Andrew Jackson to be another typical politician who turned out to be nothing more than someone who could release any principles he might have had to continue to stay in power. As for being a 'great man' with insight into a great society, I'd say he lost that vision by arresting those that disagreed with him, suppressing opposition with violence, and abandoning the rule of law to maintain a powerful position in pursuit of a self serving interest. In other words, he was a despot."
Your finding of Andrew Jackson to be another typical politician seems to be consistent with your peculiar ideations.
Andrew Johnson, Democrat Vice President, became president after the assassination of Republican Abraham Lincoln. His only crimes were public drunkenness and using his decision making power as president to reunite the United States after the civil war. "Moves were made to begin Impeachment proceedings against Johnson. But these efforts were still not strong enough and they floundered. However, the Presidents alleged violation of the Tenure Act would resurrect the Impeachment move. The Tenure Act prohibited the President from removing from office any officials whose appointment required Senate approval. On February 21, 1868, however, Johnson did exactly that to his Secretary of War, Edwin Stanton. An impeachment hearing was inevitable but failed.
But this history is well documented with written record and illustrates the character of President Johnson thereby subjecting him to your revision of history by your apparent mystic powers to understand a different president who lost his "vision by arresting those that disagreed with him, suppressing opposition with violence, and abandoning the rule of law to maintain a powerful position in pursuit of a self serving interest."
"Whose morals and insight should we accept?"
Those whose morals were laid down by the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence for the benefit those citizens. IOW those characterizes of western civilization.
"What bold initiatives should be accepted and should they be without some sort of foresight? Should anyone who takes bold initiatives be forgiven any wrongs that may be done simply because they were bold? To answer any of these questions honestly would mean that we, as a society, must progress further than we have and until we do, nothing of the sort of 'peace' we'd like to see will ever happen."
No one says that any politician or president be forgiven for taking bold initiatives in order to keep their oath of office to the American people. Democratic President Harry S. Truman also took bold initiative instead of poll taking to decide the fate of millions. To this day, many do not forgive him for opening a Pandora s Box which terminated a war that saved millions of lives.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone thinks of changing the world, but no one thinks of changing himself. ~Leo Nikolaevich Tolstoy
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
What is your point in this quotation from Tolstoy?
"quote:
Past the seeker as he prayed came the crippled and the beggar and the beaten. And seeing them... he cried, "Great God, how is it that a loving creator can see such things and yet do nothing about them?" God said, "I did do something. I made you." ~Author Unknown
You are using a citation of the concept of 'freewill' not being directed for human good by an unknowable Creator who allows bad things to happen to good people and good things happen to those who are evil. What is your point?
"Quote:
You must be the change you wish to see in the world. ~Mahatma Ghandi"
Altruism is selfishness out with a pair of field glasses and imagination.
ATTRIBUTION: Christina Stead
DKSuddeth
Senior Member
There appears to be some confusion as to which of us seems completely unable to comprehend the equivalency of same concepts posted in the English language. Apparently you do not find your own ideology to be subject to question and no amount of debate necessary.
The point I have been trying to make is to get people to understand that not only our government leaders, but us citizens as well, have made mistakes in the past and will CONTINUE to make those same mistakes until we decide to learn from our history and mistakes. Now, Since we both feel that each other is incapable of understanding the points that we've been trying to establish to each other, feel free to tell me how I should have stated such.
You supply a perfect example of your attempts to confuse the difference between red apples and red apples. Your references give little credit to our current president and the majority of Americans vs. a single minded utopia whereby human faults are seen to be devolving and unable to 'evolve' into truly peaceful utopian people. Your antiquated concepts of reality have long ago been seen for what they are; nothing more than a loss from reality.
If I read this correctly, it tells me that not only are you perfectly aware that our society hasn't grown in over 150 years, but that you singularly approve of it. Is that correct, or if I'm wrong tell me what it is you are trying to say.
I also think you have the wrong president in mind. I'm referring to Andrew Jackson, president from 1829-1837. Also, are the only historical references you put stock into are those in an official government archive or schoolbook? Because some of the history I pull from comes from the tribes themselves. Are they any less accurate?
DKSuddeth
Senior Member
What tribes are you talking about?
The Native American tribes, namely the Cherokee tribes but it would also include others with the exception of most of the Seminole.
ajwps
Active Member
- Thread starter
- #53
"The point I have been trying to make is to get people to understand that not only our government leaders, but us citizens as well, have made mistakes in the past and will CONTINUES to make those same mistakes until we decide to learn from our history and mistakes. Now, Since we both feel that each other is incapable of understanding the points that we've been trying to establish to each other, feel free to tell me how I should have stated such."
I believe that you are basically correct in your general assessment that modern mankind wrongly believes western cultures have now become 'civilized.' That this western civilization lives by a set of accepted laws and rules which has brought a minimal level of civility and equality to most of its citizens. This does not hold true for a large portion of the earth's civilization which CONTINUE to live in a sort of 7th century limbo where tribalism, hatred, distrust and an envy of the wondrous western 'infidels' remind them that they are bound by a set of rules laid down for them fourteen centuries ago. So they strike out not with their arrows and spears but with the technological weapon inventions of the enemy they so hate. Just this week, Iraqis brought a small child to Israel for the best and latest surgical care that could save the baby. Tomorrow, the same people who seek out the humanity of their enemy will try to kill the very same people who help them out of with that altruistic impulse. This is the lesson learned by humanity this very day.
In truth, this is far from the reality as predatory animals kill to eat while man does not eat those he kills either in times of peace or war. The long recorded history of mankind has demonstrated that humanity has not progressed too terrible far from our early cave man ancestors.
I also believe that we are not incapable of understanding each other's meanings but so is man incapable of learning from their former mistakes. For history is said to repeat itself because nothing is long learned from previous mistakes or history. This cynicism is based on the fact that you seem to feel some optimism that the human and his brain can eventually reach some stage of a peaceful coexistence in world free from all the past evils; hunger, war, disease and hate.
These human maladies have been present since recorded time and each succeeding generation has a very short memory. There is no Shangri-La or utopia in the future of civilization unless some cataclysmic event occurs which changes an unending cycle of human good and evil innate drives. These all too human drives are present in the limbic portion of the brain or that early amphibian portion responsible for emotions, sex, aggression, flight/fight from which we all fight against on a daily basis.
For humans to learn peace is as futile as changing the course of our sun. But this is of course only my opinion and worth nothing more than any other's.
"If I read this correctly, it tells me that not only are you perfectly aware that our society hasn't grown in over 150 years, but that you singularly approve of it. Is that correct, or if I'm wrong tell me what it is you are trying to say.
I also think you have the wrong president in mind. I'm referring to Andrew Jackson, president from 1829-1837. Also, are the only historical references you put stock into are those in an official government archive or schoolbook? Because some of the history I pull from comes from the tribes themselves. Are they any less accurate?"
No I don't approve of this fact concerning the obvious lack of change but I must face this reality. I am sorry about the error I made about Presidents Andrew Johnson and Jackson in my previous posts. Your correct that I put a great deal of credence to recorded history, i.e., books, manuscripts, eye witness reports with the knowledge that even our society indulges in some self-serving revisionism.
You put your faith in the words of the Indian tribes treated so poorly by President Andrew Jackson. His administration was responsible for moving these indigenous tribes from their land to another less suitable.
But you must also consider the fact that those American Indians to whom you referred were not the original inhabitants of these lands. The earlier pre-historic mound builder cultural development in North America was known as the Mississippian Culture, thriving from approximately 800 AD until they too were displaced by the later arriving Indian populations across from Mongolia. The Mississippian Culture spanned from Wisconsin and Minnesota in the north, through Georgia to the south, and westward into the Great Plains.
So each culture displaces a previous culture which seems to be an unending cycles of homosapiens. I do have faith that one bright shiny day will arrive when your utopian society will exist, only if man can survive his own technology.
I do not believe that President Bush has any evil or ulterior motivation in his mind or heart. His actions are based on his drive to be re-elected and in doing so has caused somewhat of a sea change in the events of mankind. No longer is there a state of waiting to be attacked from those who wish us harm, but for better or worse, a decisive move to alter the course of a state of hiding our heads in the sand waiting for the inevitable. We can only hope in some sort of blind fate or luck to bring an end to these hostilities which destroy life.
There are also those immutable laws of all specie population control which are much like the forces of nature. Whether mice, monkeys, men, deer, turtles or anything living becomes overpopulated, these natural laws seem to take over and thin out the population. The three laws (Malthusian) are 1) war, 2) starvation and 3) disease. Right now there is no significant loss of life from war or starvation but there is a disease that increases the loss of life by each day. That disease of course is AIDS.
But this is only my opinion which has no more credence than yours or the next man.
I believe that you are basically correct in your general assessment that modern mankind wrongly believes western cultures have now become 'civilized.' That this western civilization lives by a set of accepted laws and rules which has brought a minimal level of civility and equality to most of its citizens. This does not hold true for a large portion of the earth's civilization which CONTINUE to live in a sort of 7th century limbo where tribalism, hatred, distrust and an envy of the wondrous western 'infidels' remind them that they are bound by a set of rules laid down for them fourteen centuries ago. So they strike out not with their arrows and spears but with the technological weapon inventions of the enemy they so hate. Just this week, Iraqis brought a small child to Israel for the best and latest surgical care that could save the baby. Tomorrow, the same people who seek out the humanity of their enemy will try to kill the very same people who help them out of with that altruistic impulse. This is the lesson learned by humanity this very day.
In truth, this is far from the reality as predatory animals kill to eat while man does not eat those he kills either in times of peace or war. The long recorded history of mankind has demonstrated that humanity has not progressed too terrible far from our early cave man ancestors.
I also believe that we are not incapable of understanding each other's meanings but so is man incapable of learning from their former mistakes. For history is said to repeat itself because nothing is long learned from previous mistakes or history. This cynicism is based on the fact that you seem to feel some optimism that the human and his brain can eventually reach some stage of a peaceful coexistence in world free from all the past evils; hunger, war, disease and hate.
These human maladies have been present since recorded time and each succeeding generation has a very short memory. There is no Shangri-La or utopia in the future of civilization unless some cataclysmic event occurs which changes an unending cycle of human good and evil innate drives. These all too human drives are present in the limbic portion of the brain or that early amphibian portion responsible for emotions, sex, aggression, flight/fight from which we all fight against on a daily basis.
For humans to learn peace is as futile as changing the course of our sun. But this is of course only my opinion and worth nothing more than any other's.
"If I read this correctly, it tells me that not only are you perfectly aware that our society hasn't grown in over 150 years, but that you singularly approve of it. Is that correct, or if I'm wrong tell me what it is you are trying to say.
I also think you have the wrong president in mind. I'm referring to Andrew Jackson, president from 1829-1837. Also, are the only historical references you put stock into are those in an official government archive or schoolbook? Because some of the history I pull from comes from the tribes themselves. Are they any less accurate?"
No I don't approve of this fact concerning the obvious lack of change but I must face this reality. I am sorry about the error I made about Presidents Andrew Johnson and Jackson in my previous posts. Your correct that I put a great deal of credence to recorded history, i.e., books, manuscripts, eye witness reports with the knowledge that even our society indulges in some self-serving revisionism.
You put your faith in the words of the Indian tribes treated so poorly by President Andrew Jackson. His administration was responsible for moving these indigenous tribes from their land to another less suitable.
But you must also consider the fact that those American Indians to whom you referred were not the original inhabitants of these lands. The earlier pre-historic mound builder cultural development in North America was known as the Mississippian Culture, thriving from approximately 800 AD until they too were displaced by the later arriving Indian populations across from Mongolia. The Mississippian Culture spanned from Wisconsin and Minnesota in the north, through Georgia to the south, and westward into the Great Plains.
So each culture displaces a previous culture which seems to be an unending cycles of homosapiens. I do have faith that one bright shiny day will arrive when your utopian society will exist, only if man can survive his own technology.
I do not believe that President Bush has any evil or ulterior motivation in his mind or heart. His actions are based on his drive to be re-elected and in doing so has caused somewhat of a sea change in the events of mankind. No longer is there a state of waiting to be attacked from those who wish us harm, but for better or worse, a decisive move to alter the course of a state of hiding our heads in the sand waiting for the inevitable. We can only hope in some sort of blind fate or luck to bring an end to these hostilities which destroy life.
There are also those immutable laws of all specie population control which are much like the forces of nature. Whether mice, monkeys, men, deer, turtles or anything living becomes overpopulated, these natural laws seem to take over and thin out the population. The three laws (Malthusian) are 1) war, 2) starvation and 3) disease. Right now there is no significant loss of life from war or starvation but there is a disease that increases the loss of life by each day. That disease of course is AIDS.
But this is only my opinion which has no more credence than yours or the next man.
jejeje.
Andrew Johnson. Well, he was a "Jacksonian"...
Would you mind providing information for the source which you quoted from, AJ? You know, a REFERENCE of some kind?
Here's a site on the Trail of Tears. You don't exactly have to dig to find all the information you want about the unethical treatment of native Americans. Then again, if you're looking for it under "Andrew Johnson", you might have a bit more trouble. But only a bit.
http://ngeorgia.com/history/nghisttt.html
Reminds me of the kid in my fourth grade class who had to read his book report on George Washington Carver aloud to the class. He was about ten seconds into it, when the bemused teacher realized that he hadn't read the book. He had copied his report from an Encylopedia.
He'd probably have gotten away with it too, except that he'd copied the entry on George Washington.
A side note: most of the "official" biographies on Andrew Jackson on the net (see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/aj7.html for the white house's page...) do not make any mention of the Trail of Tears.
Andrew Johnson. Well, he was a "Jacksonian"...
Would you mind providing information for the source which you quoted from, AJ? You know, a REFERENCE of some kind?
Here's a site on the Trail of Tears. You don't exactly have to dig to find all the information you want about the unethical treatment of native Americans. Then again, if you're looking for it under "Andrew Johnson", you might have a bit more trouble. But only a bit.
http://ngeorgia.com/history/nghisttt.html
Reminds me of the kid in my fourth grade class who had to read his book report on George Washington Carver aloud to the class. He was about ten seconds into it, when the bemused teacher realized that he hadn't read the book. He had copied his report from an Encylopedia.
He'd probably have gotten away with it too, except that he'd copied the entry on George Washington.
A side note: most of the "official" biographies on Andrew Jackson on the net (see: http://www.whitehouse.gov/history/presidents/aj7.html for the white house's page...) do not make any mention of the Trail of Tears.
ajwps
Active Member
- Thread starter
- #55
Former American presidents Andrew Jackson/Johnson or any other has little to do with the discusson at hand.
My post was based on common knowledge while mistaking one common named president with another. Both had their faults and qualities just as Bush does today.
My reference was a Google search for relevant information. You find the same 'trail of tears' for the indigenous populations found here as provided by the Anglo pilgrims of North America.
Well what about the 'trail of tears' the Indians left behind when they dispossessed those mound builders here before the Indians?
You remind me of the fourth grade kid who delights in the misfortunes and mistakes of his classmates. What humanity you display in your gleeful delight about the Andrew presidents error.
http://blessusa.homestead.com/gatherbyriver.html
What is your problem?
My post was based on common knowledge while mistaking one common named president with another. Both had their faults and qualities just as Bush does today.
My reference was a Google search for relevant information. You find the same 'trail of tears' for the indigenous populations found here as provided by the Anglo pilgrims of North America.
Well what about the 'trail of tears' the Indians left behind when they dispossessed those mound builders here before the Indians?
You remind me of the fourth grade kid who delights in the misfortunes and mistakes of his classmates. What humanity you display in your gleeful delight about the Andrew presidents error.
http://blessusa.homestead.com/gatherbyriver.html
What is your problem?
Similar threads
- Replies
- 7
- Views
- 281
- Replies
- 107
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 4
- Views
- 182
- Replies
- 48
- Views
- 711
- Replies
- 107
- Views
- 1K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 27
- Views
- 92
- Replies
- 23
- Views
- 76
- Replies
- 17
- Views
- 31
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8039
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 468
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-