Lying Presidents

RE: Lying Presidents

"Every person is entitled to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, not just Americans."


Contrary to some people's opinion, I don't think that this statement is an axiom, so please, for the sake of those of us who don't think it is, support/explain your postulate.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Basic human rights. All people should be entitled to the same basic principles. Most people agree, bioethicists excluded. Every human life has value, the same value as any other. My argument was that by placing our own interests first, we infringe upon the freedoms of others. True, in some cases they have already been oppressed, but that gives us no right to say, "well, we think this is better for us, and maybe it's better for you, so this is the way it is." Its just not polite.http://www.columbusracing.com/ubb/wink.gif
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Here's my (rare) two cents:

Given the tone of responses typed after my statement - I find I am not comfy in this section of the LOD. I pulled my opinion off this thread.

Have fun...
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Eli, I will agree with you that we shouldn't attempt to force our government/values on other nations. Where we differ, however, is that I don't think that America should need a half-assed reason to proactively attack some other country. This isn't the school yard where everyone behaves by The Code, but rather, this, at its most basic level, is life attempting to exist in an environment that is hostile. Darwin was right when he only the fittest (should) survive. Our American predecessors, or at least some of them, worked hard and died to create the freedoms that we enjoy today. The only excuse any group of people have for not having a freedom-based government is lack of intelligence. <me looks at Africa> I think you will agree with me when I say that cognitive intelligence is mostly hereditary. If these sub intelligent humans cannot create a freedom-oriented society, why the hell do we think they'll be able to maintain one that is set up for them? When a group of people cannot even figure out how to meet the basic needs of life (food, water, housing, cleanliness) after being in existance for at least four thousand years, why do we think that they are equal to us? Nature has selected them for extinction. We should not step in and interfere with what is inevitable. All humans are not equal.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

... Every human life has value, the same value as any other. ...
Click to expand...

I disagree. All humans are not equal, never have been, and never will be. Certainly, every human life has value, but only so much as it can achieve. Human achievement is what enables human life. One should always place their own interests ahead of everything else. That is basic human nature.

It has been shown that capitalism is the best system for supplying the most wealth to the most people.

As for your other quote "All people should be entitled to the same basic principles", I can agree with that. As long as those principles are something like this:
1) you can't consume more than you produce
2) you must take responsibility for your own actions
3) your own interests are paramount - everything else is secondary

Those are the laws of nature, and if you don't like them, get out of the gene pool. Maybe if life were harder we wouldn't have so many idealists. Look at our own history, at the hardships our ancestors endured. This is the country where they were allowed to produce, and keep the products of their labor, and trade them to survive. Their hard work, the fact that they had the incentive to build wealth, is what made us all so rich today.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Those are the laws of nature, and if you don't like them, get out of the gene pool. Maybe if life were harder we wouldn't have so many idealists. Look at our own history, at the hardships our ancestors endured. This is the country where they were allowed to produce, and keep the products of their labor, and trade them to survive. Their hard work, the fact that they had the incentive to build wealth, is what made us all so rich today.


No, slavery is what made our country rich today. As a matter of fact, your argument is valid if you exclude black people and women. Is that what you meant? I am saddened by this point of view. I knew I would get jumped on for posting my thoughts on here. Most people on this board are intelligent people that I get along with. I just don't agree with the political points of view. Of all those who oppose me, have you ever lived in another country? Seen how the other side live? It seems to me the only people supporting capitalism come from families who have never known poverty. Take this stance when you're poor. It'll have more bearing then.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

No, slavery is what made our country rich today. As a matter of fact, your argument is valid if you exclude black people and women. Is that what you meant? I am saddened by this point of view. I knew I would get jumped on for posting my thoughts on here. Most people on this board are intelligent people that I get along with. I just don't agree with the political points of view. Of all those who oppose me, have you ever lived in another country? Seen how the other side live? It seems to me the only people supporting capitalism come from families who have never known poverty. Take this stance when you're poor. It'll have more bearing then.
Click to expand...

I think you're way off-base on the slavery thing there. Just because some people down south used slaves to pick their cotton, does that mean that we would not have become a great nation without slavery?

I'm not jumping on you, i'm just disagreeing with you. Argument promotes thought, which in the end, is only good.

Do you think Condaleeza Rice is a socialist?

Has socialism ever allowed a poor man to become rich while remaining honest?

What incentive does one have to produce, in a socialist system?

Why should need be a claim to wealth, rather than ability?
 
RE: Lying Presidents

"Of all those who oppose me, have you ever lived in another country?

I know I haven't.

"It seems to me the only people supporting capitalism come from families who have never known poverty. Take this stance when you're poor. It'll have more bearing then.

My parents were poor, my grandparents were poor. I have heard the stories where my grandma used a mattress spring to trap birds so they had something to eat. You know what, they worked a heck of alot harder than I do because they had to come from nothing. Outside of the Rockerfellers and a few other families, your comment is absolutely off the wall. This country is great because of the sacrifices paid by our parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents. Hard work, hard work, hard work and sacrifice, coupled with opportunity seized, NOT handed to them.

Why are people poor in this country? There is no reason. Why does the average union worker think that all they have to work is 40 hours and they should be set. Anybody that has wealth didn't get it working 40 hours a week. Most toiled 60-80 hours to get where they are today.

Eli, I like your discussions. Don't go away. Come back stronger. I just think your entitlement mentality hurts mankind. We work harder because we can get ahead. If all the efforts were just "donated" to someone less fortunate, how long would you work hard. Take a look at France and Italy for an example...

Poor people in other countries? Yes, they are poor because they have no opportunity, and if they did create something of value, it is often taken away. That is the difference between our philosphies.

A.) I choose to make the pie bigger so everyone is encouraged to participate. B.) You want to make the slices smaller so more people get a slice.

I guess it is that simple.



'93 MonsterMark Project Car
Bryan
 
RE: Lying Presidents

I can't stay and argue. I must go to work (how ironic). I will be back to continue this. Don't think I'm running away.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

One should always place their own interests ahead of everything else. That is basic human nature.
Click to expand...

Dave, Dave, Dave - I'll bet you an LOD shot glass that if you ask any sampling of mothers, that will not be the answer they give you. ;-) It is NOT human nature to put ones own interests above all others. But it also denies that fact that it may be to my best interest without me knowing it now, to have a great majority of those who are not "producing" now, be able to in the future. Let's not forget the kids.


But what I would like clarified is: what is production? In a capitalist society, it's supposed to be supply and demand, but how then does one produce enough to be a "viable" person if their abilities aren't enough to produce enough for a good living?

And again - what about our kids? Bryan, you talk about working 80 hours a week, but have you ever been a single mom? Do you think it is good for kids to not have a parent around for that much of their lives? Let's face it, it's generally when we are young that we are struggling to succeed and gain all those things that make us a "successful" person. But that's also generally when our kids are young. So what happens to them then? Is the next generation not going to be so screwed up that they can't produce? If so, that's not to my (or our) best interest.

I see the arguments you guys are making, and they work just fine for the usual white male, but it doesn't take into account so many other factors.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

And again - what about our kids? Bryan, you talk about working 80 hours a week, but have you ever been a single mom? Do you think it is good for kids to not have a parent around for that much of their lives? Let's face it, it's generally when we are young that we are struggling to succeed and gain all those things that make us a "successful" person. But that's also generally when our kids are young. So what happens to them then? Is the next generation not going to be so screwed up that they can't produce?

I hope I don't piss you off right now but here goes. First off, I did not say I work 80 hours. I sold my business that was running my life and now I run my life that runs my business. If I work 10 hours, thats alot. I spend another 30 hours "thinking" how to make money. That is the secret to wealth creation. Provide a good or service that other people need. The more people you satisfy, the more you make, usually without a geometric increase in workload.

Here is the stinger. I completely understand the struggle of the single mother. Two of my wife's friends are single mothers. That is probably why my wife and I wouldn't get divorced. At least not until the kids are out of the house. A woman makes a conscious decision to get married and have kids. I understand that some guys are creeps. But, alot of people get divorced because they are selfish and don't want to sacrifice, (many instances can be provided). In our society, our expectations and standard of living requires most of us to have two incomes to get by. You know, 2 cars, 2 TV's, dinner out 6 times a month, etc, etc. So, unless you are really banking it, it usually requires a spouse to do some of the earning too. I understand. I also understand that sometimes sacrifices have to be made that are very unpleasant, like staying in a crappy marriage. Or getting out of one and finding another guy or maybe (gal). All kids should have a father and mother. It is your responsibility to make that happen. Whatever it takes. The breakdown of the American nuclear family (father, mother, kids) is truly one the great threats our country faces.


'93 MonsterMark Project Car
Bryan
 
RE: Lying Presidents

[link:www.libertyhaven.com/politicsandcurrentevents/healthcarewelfareorsocialsecurity/swedens.shtml|Sweden's Welfare State: A Paradise Lost.] It's long, it's educational and a good read.

I have no problem with helping the downtrodden. I just don't think a bureaucrat that gains power by promising cradle to grave help, then controls the recipients of it because he is the one that distributes the cash should be in charge of it. This belongs in the private sector's charities and through voluntary deductible contributions.

http://members.tccoa.com/lastmrk/Images/lastmrk2.jpg
 
RE: Lying Presidents


Here's my (rare) two cents:

Given the tone of responses typed after my statement - I find I am not comfy in this section of the LOD. I pulled my opinion off this thread.

Have fun...

[/quote]


Well, why is this thread here in the first place? Some of us asked for a political forum, and all we got were polls and hem-hawing. And since no one but a couple of people are willing to try out the forum Splat set up for us (why is that?), this is all that's left. This just proves the point that we're going to discuss these things no matter what.

My problem at this point is that there are so many topics floating around in this one thread that I can't even keep track of them, let alone respond like I want to. But I feel that if I start another thread, I'm stepping on eggshells.

So we're down to three choices: Move this discussion to Splat's [a href="http://www.snipershark2.net/forums/index.php"]City Hall Forum[/a]; create a dedicated political forum here on this site; or we go with the status quo.

I'm perfectly happy with the City Hall forum, but hardly anyone from here participates. What's the problem guys?

I'd also support a political forum here, but ONLY if the alert-button-clicking-busybodies understand that they're not welcome. I already outlined a plan which should make everyone happy, and I'm not going into it again.

Otherwise, we keep things as is, and deal with the bitching and moaning.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Trixie, baby, I would argue that having kids is in ones best (self) interest. You certainly don't bring kids into the world for their sake, so even mothers are ultimately selfish. This is not a bad thing, but rather, it is human nature at its grandest. One could, maybe two hundred years ago, argue that it is imperative for all people to procreate for the sake of this nation. In that, women (mothers) have value, since no matter how hard I try I cannot make a baby with Mr. Little Jon and my right hand. (I've tried many times, but to no avail) Today, however, this country is horribly overpopulated, and by bringing more kids into this situation does nothing but complicate our social and economic problem. So mothers then, for the most part are not only non-productive members of society, but are, on the contrary, a huge drain and burden to the rest of the productive members of this nation. If a person does not have value add he should be left to fend for himself or deported.
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Trixie, baby, I would argue that having kids is in ones best (self) interest. You certainly don't bring kids into the world for their sake, so even mothers are ultimately selfish. This is not a bad thing, but rather, it is human nature at its grandest...Today, however, this country is horribly overpopulated, and by bringing more kids into this situation does nothing but complicate our social and economic problem. So mothers then, for the most part are not only non-productive members of society, but are, on the contrary, a huge drain and burden to the rest of the productive members of this nation. If a person does not have value add he should be left to fend for himself or deported.
Click to expand...


Oh man JD, I can never tell when you are serious or just trying to provoke (TROLL!)! "mothers then, for the most part are not only non-productive members of society, but are, on the contrary, a huge drain and burden to the rest of the productive members of this nation" -

OK maybe YOUR mother is a deadbeat waste of space (why else would you project that description to all mothers, if yours was not) but I know my mother was not, and neither is my girlfriend, who is the other of a 3yr old. Now, my ex-wife... it could be argued LOL

IF a mother does a good job, she produces a productive and postive thinking member of society. If she does not, you get a lazy good-for-nothing jerk. We've got too many of these already.


----++++++++----

Bryan, why should somebody expect to work 60-80 hours per week just to have basic provisions to raise a family? (Is that what you mean by "be set"?) Not everyone is interested in driving themselves to wealth 80 hrs per week. Some just want to live more modest lives, have a comfortable home, a good family, and not be hungry. Should that take 60-80 hours of work per week? I think an experienced and skilled worker should be able to provide a middle-class living for a family without spending more than 1/3 of his life at work. Sure, you want more, you want to make the sacrifice, work 168 hours a week if you like. This is America that is your right. Not an obligation. So I think it is a reasonable expectation for an experienced factory worker to make a decent wage that will support a family above the poverty line. No, he won't get rich. But he shouldn't be poor.

----++++++++----

And finaly, back to the original topic

The ends do not justify the means.

Can anyone argue that to be false? Can anyone make a moral argument that the ends can justify the means? That would be fun... I'm sure JD can try!! LOL

But I accept it as true.

Therefore, IF our gov't lied to us to get our support for the war, that cannot be justified by any amount of success in the war itself. Even if Iraq was a wonderful happy place today (which it ISN'T), that would not justify the lies told by our gov't to us.

So what can be done about it? Nothing. Find the CIA analyst who spun the intelligence and fire him? Big nothing.

So what if Cheney knew it was spun, and that the spin coming from CIA would shield the administration from the fact of the lie. That's using the depth of your organization to provide plausible deniability, and it is dishonest at best. The administration knew the intelligence was inflated, exaggerated, spun to support pre-existing hypotheses, but put it out there as objective facts. That's called LYING.












94 Mark VIII, Black / Black
 
RE: Lying Presidents

OK maybe YOUR mother is a deadbeat waste of space (why else would you project that description to all mothers, if yours was not) but I know my mother was not, and neither is my girlfriend, who is the other of a 3yr old. Now, my ex-wife... it could be argued LOL

IF a mother does a good job, she produces a productive and postive thinking member of society. If she does not, you get a lazy good-for-nothing jerk. We've got too many of these already.


I think the point JD was trying to make is that being a mother is a choice, made for selfish reasons, just as all choices should be made. I think he's right, and i see nothing in your argument to refute that. He didn't say "deadbeat waste of space", he said "non-productive member of society". Which is partially correct. As a mother, she is choosing to produce a resource that is not currently needed (the child), not that that is a bad thing, because if she does her job right, the child could change the world for the better (and be considered a much-needed resource). But it is a selfish motive. Have you ever heard someone say "it's my duty to bring another child into this world"? When i hear it, it always sounds like "I want to have kids".


Bryan, why should somebody expect to work 60-80 hours per week just to have basic provisions to raise a family? (Is that what you mean by "be set"?) Not everyone is interested in driving themselves to wealth 80 hrs per week. Some just want to live more modest lives, have a comfortable home, a good family, and not be hungry. Should that take 60-80 hours of work per week? I think an experienced and skilled worker should be able to provide a middle-class living for a family without spending more than 1/3 of his life at work. Sure, you want more, you want to make the sacrifice, work 168 hours a week if you like. This is America that is your right. Not an obligation. So I think it is a reasonable expectation for an experienced factory worker to make a decent wage that will support a family above the poverty line. No, he won't get rich. But he shouldn't be poor.


Exactly. And he shouldn't expect handouts from those who DID work 60-80 hours a week, shouldn't expect to live in a half-million dollar house, and shouldn't expect to drive a corvette. But he should be able to provide a comfortable living for his family, in a modest home.


The administration knew the intelligence was inflated, exaggerated, spun to support pre-existing hypotheses, but put it out there as objective facts. That's called LYING.


And that's called CONJECTURE.

:)
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Bush's use of the "nuclear material from africa" argument was done after he knew it was false. This has been documented and is not conjecture. There are other examples from Colin Powells' speech to the UN.




94 Mark VIII, Black / Black
 
RE: Lying Presidents

David, "Bryan, why should somebody expect to work 60-80 hours per week just to have basic provisions to raise a family? (Is that what you mean by "be set"?)

At some point break down the "basic provisions" into single elements and lets look at each item. Is a nintendo game basic? How bout 2 TV's? New shoes because the old ones are dirty? Dominos pizza delivered? What is basic. Compared to the rest of the world, that would be food (like sugar, rice, wheat, etc.) water, housing (mattress if lucky, 4-5 people in 500 sq.ft., education, etc. My point was our idea of basic has changed over the years and what would have been called extravangant years ago is now called basic. Yes, I agree, a person should be able to hold a decent factory job and make the essential bills. A second person working should be able to provide some of the perks. That's about it. If you want more, you got to go out and get it. Get a second job, sleep 4 hours per night. Save every penny. Put the saved money to work for you, intelligently. Take some money classes. Learn how to work with it. Take a risk, take a shot if you want more. If not, don't complain. You have it better than 90% of the planet's population now.

'93 MonsterMark Project Car
Bryan
 
RE: Lying Presidents

Hi Ya All: Ive been watching this thread with intrest.
It would seem that the older the person posting, the closer to the truth
he gets.
Bryan I dont know how old you are, but I would guess late thritys. Yet
you are one of the few that seem to understand that no one, not a single
swingin dick in this country is entitled to anything! Not "a comfortable
home" not an automobile, not even one TV, food, clothing, health care,
NOTHING!.
We have these things because we get off our butts and work for them.
As Bryan says, if you are happy with three hots and a cot, perhaps you
wont have to work as hard or put as many hours in as the next guy who
wants a bit more for himself. Now if you really are hardcore about having
your toys and a fairly comfortable life, you must be willing to work about
three or four times the 3 hots and a cot guy.
No one is entitled to a damn thing except what our constution gave us,
and thats the right to do what we can for ourselves.

I will admit Im really pissed when I hear some of you talking about
"redistrubition" of wealth. Some ie "Hillary" and some of you want to
take from the haves and give to the havenots. WHY?

I fail to understand why any group of people should be given anything!
If they dont have what they think they require they should stop breeding
and go get a damn job. One not enough? Get two, or even three.
And Trix, Yes I do symp with single moms, but I also think they should
be satisfied to accept a lower standred of living, one that the mother can
afford. I also think deadbeat dads should be hung by the short hairs if
they dont support their children and take an active involvement in their
growing up. Everyone wants the best they can give for their kids, and I
believe they should try and do this, but not at the expense of others.

I also strongly believe that if you cant afford children, dont have them.
Its not fair to the child, the parent, or the community.

I could contiune this for pages, but would receive hate mail, nastygrams,
etc. So will stop.. Jack

And yes I speak with some knowledge about these things. I have been
at both ends of the stick, and most stops on the lower end.

And btw: If you took all the wealth and advanges away from the haves,
and gave it all to the havenots, within 5 years it would all be back where
it started. Cheers! Would anyone care to challange that?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top