"John Smith" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:

...
The Forrestal disaster was attributed to druggies. The enemy was no
doubt
there on board. Many people have yet to figure out about the mechanics
of
such disasters. I submit that there will be 2 sides to every story to
come
out of the Vietnam war, and that sufficient truth is often left out to
allow
that.

I wrecked a few cars before I learned how to drive. Have you ever been
tortured for information? or just for the hell of it? People who sit
around
and talk about it over tea aren't fit to judge who a hero is but they
are
often left to talk about it. Let's just call him "experienced". I
really
don't consider Obama to be the "Black Messiah" either.

I feel that both candidates were potential disasters, showing the idiots
had
prevailed before the election. The vote only served as an international
"poll" on how best to proceed to our doom. It seems the election has
tried
to set the clock back to what it was before 9/11. Let's see what
develops
this time around.

Along the way, though college, it is pointed out to you that any great
story (or, at least a believable one) has a protagonist and an
antagonist (sometimes more of them, sometimes less of them); i.e. a
"good guy" and a "bad guy." It is based on a storyline where great
adversity is found, great sacrifice and energy extended and exerted, and
finally the defeat of the enemy is had ... funny, but we will fall for
this same line though uncounted books by uncounted authors. Read any
great Greek tragedies/novels/plays, Shakespeare knew this and you find
it in his offerings. (Or, turn on Rush, "... bad democrats, good
republicans ...", this is simply recited over-and-over again to keep
idiots in line and massage the weak minds into the hypnotic/religious
lies which got us here ... some still have futures which hinge on
keeping the insanity alive. Indeed, real change will bring collapse ...)

Such is also how our political system is arranged, good guy vs. bad guy
(and, you just pick who is good and who is bad, or toss a coin. Or have
you allegiances bought and paid for ...) And, so is our foreign policy
applied, we are the good guy, they are the bad guy and these are our
friends who help us in our great adventure ... fear gets the whole ball
rolling, even unjustified fear(s) will work ...

Someday, all will see the truth, become ashamed of living such a shallow
"truth(s)", and be shamed into higher standards and goals ... until that
time, a few can control the minds of many ... and ultimately the world.

Regards,
JS


I had considered the "good cop", "bad cop" routine, but I really think it
goes back to the "demoralization" and "destabilization" process that you
yourself (and myself) admit to in lost faith, but healthy distrust along
with a sense of reality is vital, but not to the point of being crippled.

Rush noticed that what's "good" for the Country is "bad" for the democrats
and what's "bad" for the Country is "good" for the democrats. It isn't lost
on me that "when it bleeds it leads". Who for example is responsible for
those who apply psychological pressure to "known" gun owners to induce them
to random mass murder? Who would that benefit? There are many cynical
people out there with a sick sense of humor. Your assertion that real
change would bring collapse is too cynical and I wouldn't set myself up to
be wrong unless there is a complete failure. That just gives us the wrong
goal. Seek God. I know you hate "religion" but rather than seeking as a
blind follower, seek as a researcher. Set those things aside that you don't
immediately understand but don't entirely dismiss them. That is simply
arrogance. The intellectual is a fathead who completely dismisses that
which he doesn't understand or what is related to him by the unschooled.
Those who do that operate contrary to the scientific method. Even a failed
experiment shouldn't be thrown out, but learned from. Or saved until the
failure is understood.

In light of that, "The Interview" link I posted earlier, the true threat is
the cynicism that developed that whole school of thought. It is a process
of destruction. Not only that, but of unchecked destruction.

JB wrote:

...
I had considered the "good cop", "bad cop" routine, but I really think it
goes back to the "demoralization" and "destabilization" process that you
yourself (and myself) admit to in lost faith, but healthy distrust along
with a sense of reality is vital, but not to the point of being crippled.

Rush noticed that what's "good" for the Country is "bad" for the democrats
and what's "bad" for the Country is "good" for the democrats. It isn't lost
on me that "when it bleeds it leads". Who for example is responsible for
those who apply psychological pressure to "known" gun owners to induce them
to random mass murder? Who would that benefit? There are many cynical
people out there with a sick sense of humor. Your assertion that real
change would bring collapse is too cynical and I wouldn't set myself up to
be wrong unless there is a complete failure. That just gives us the wrong
goal. Seek God. I know you hate "religion" but rather than seeking as a
blind follower, seek as a researcher. Set those things aside that you don't
immediately understand but don't entirely dismiss them. That is simply
arrogance. The intellectual is a fathead who completely dismisses that
which he doesn't understand or what is related to him by the unschooled.
Those who do that operate contrary to the scientific method. Even a failed
experiment shouldn't be thrown out, but learned from. Or saved until the
failure is understood.

In light of that, "The Interview" link I posted earlier, the true threat is
the cynicism that developed that whole school of thought. It is a process
of destruction. Not only that, but of unchecked destruction.

"What is good for the country" is a religious term, the way it is being
used lacks any real meaning ...

"The country" is its' citizens. It is not the buildings, it is not the
wealth, it is not plots of dirt ... when our public servants carry out
the majority of the people wills, while preventing great harm to
minorities, it is doing its' job. Government was created to serve the
people. It was never created to be an institution of "leaders" who set
policy, define monetary systems, influence the people, etc. It was
created to provide what the people requested, it is ONLY a tool which is
only valid when it is suffer-able to the people.

Government does a good job when it provides public transportation
systems, public roads, public sewer system, public water supplies,
public electric/gas/heating/etc. Public schools with high standards,
and those standards controlled by the people, is a good thing. Public
health is another good example, it protects us from ill individuals who
are threats to innocents lives. You get the point--only involved in
things which provide equal services/protections to EACH-AND-EVERY-SINGLE
citizen.

Government does NOT do its' job when it takes religions marriage and
redefines it for a minority which break the very meaning of the word
(indeed, it breaks the separation of church and states powers from the
get-go ...)

What is "good for the country" is good for ALL peoples (poor, rich,
educated, uneducated, white, black, young, old, etc.), what is good for
a minority is NOT good for the country.

Government should be like toilet paper, it is appreciated by all and
servers all equally well ... grin

Regards,
JS

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 03:47:46 GMT, "JB" wrote:


"John Smith" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:

...
The Forrestal disaster was attributed to druggies. The enemy was no
doubt
there on board. Many people have yet to figure out about the mechanics
of
such disasters. I submit that there will be 2 sides to every story to
come
out of the Vietnam war, and that sufficient truth is often left out to
allow
that.

I wrecked a few cars before I learned how to drive. Have you ever been
tortured for information? or just for the hell of it? People who sit
around
and talk about it over tea aren't fit to judge who a hero is but they
are
often left to talk about it. Let's just call him "experienced". I
really
don't consider Obama to be the "Black Messiah" either.

I feel that both candidates were potential disasters, showing the idiots
had
prevailed before the election. The vote only served as an international
"poll" on how best to proceed to our doom. It seems the election has
tried
to set the clock back to what it was before 9/11. Let's see what
develops
this time around.

Along the way, though college, it is pointed out to you that any great
story (or, at least a believable one) has a protagonist and an
antagonist (sometimes more of them, sometimes less of them); i.e. a
"good guy" and a "bad guy." It is based on a storyline where great
adversity is found, great sacrifice and energy extended and exerted, and
finally the defeat of the enemy is had ... funny, but we will fall for
this same line though uncounted books by uncounted authors. Read any
great Greek tragedies/novels/plays, Shakespeare knew this and you find
it in his offerings. (Or, turn on Rush, "... bad democrats, good
republicans ...", this is simply recited over-and-over again to keep
idiots in line and massage the weak minds into the hypnotic/religious
lies which got us here ... some still have futures which hinge on
keeping the insanity alive. Indeed, real change will bring collapse ...)

Such is also how our political system is arranged, good guy vs. bad guy
(and, you just pick who is good and who is bad, or toss a coin. Or have
you allegiances bought and paid for ...) And, so is our foreign policy
applied, we are the good guy, they are the bad guy and these are our
friends who help us in our great adventure ... fear gets the whole ball
rolling, even unjustified fear(s) will work ...

Someday, all will see the truth, become ashamed of living such a shallow
"truth(s)", and be shamed into higher standards and goals ... until that
time, a few can control the minds of many ... and ultimately the world.

Regards,
JS


I had considered the "good cop", "bad cop" routine, but I really think it
goes back to the "demoralization" and "destabilization" process that you
yourself (and myself) admit to in lost faith, but healthy distrust along
with a sense of reality is vital, but not to the point of being crippled.

Rush noticed that what's "good" for the Country is "bad" for the democrats
and what's "bad" for the Country is "good" for the democrats. It isn't lost
on me that "when it bleeds it leads". Who for example is responsible for
those who apply psychological pressure to "known" gun owners to induce them
to random mass murder? Who would that benefit? There are many cynical
people out there with a sick sense of humor. Your assertion that real
change would bring collapse is too cynical and I wouldn't set myself up to
be wrong unless there is a complete failure. That just gives us the wrong
goal. Seek God. I know you hate "religion" but rather than seeking as a
blind follower, seek as a researcher. Set those things aside that you don't
immediately understand but don't entirely dismiss them. That is simply
arrogance. The intellectual is a fathead who completely dismisses that
which he doesn't understand or what is related to him by the unschooled.
Those who do that operate contrary to the scientific method. Even a failed
experiment shouldn't be thrown out, but learned from. Or saved until the
failure is understood.

In light of that, "The Interview" link I posted earlier, the true threat is
the cynicism that developed that whole school of thought. It is a process
of destruction. Not only that, but of unchecked destruction.



Just everything Rush wanted was worse than what we had.

JosephKK wrote:

...
Just everything Rush wanted was worse than what we had.


I like listening to Rush, very entertaining ...

I am unable to wrap my mind around the fact "they" pay him 40-50 million
a year for such mind numbing dribble ... but hey, "they" got us here in
the first place!

Regards,
JS