 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
In Reply to: BWAHAHAHAHA, BWAHAHAHAHA, BWAHAHAHAHA, BWAHAHAHAHA, BWAHAHAHAHA, BWAHAHAHAHA, posted by Mart on February 23, 2000 at 15:36:10:
hi Mart,
1) for someone who rants about rights; this is an odd one. Tell me, free country or not? If it's free, a Commie should be free, to express his opinion, or make a movie. Sounds to me like you are trying to have it both ways- free for you, not free for the other guy
2) No, Nixon was not a liberal; he was a politician. That comment about a
"single FBI file" was amusing. The use of the military as a political weapon is simply not communist, nor is it fascist, and it certainly is not
democratic. It is a classic exercise of power that derives from Machiavelli, if it must have intellectual origin.
3) perhaps, perhaps not, the last time i looked there was not enough evidence to make it worthy of discussion. If you can refer me to a book, or
historical journal, that has unearthed something new, i would be interested. Otherwise, you are conflating speculation and fact. Or is a wanton disregard for the truth ok when you do it?
4) four brings together too many issues to deal with. But...
a) a recovery happens where it happens, there are places ( Maine being one of them ) where you really won't see a lot of improvement. For countries, states, or individuals, the best long term investment for economic growth is an investment in education. Unlike most economic ideas, this has been demonstrated time, and time again.
b) no president i know of has been more than tangentially successful in influencing the economy in a postive manner. The teamwork between Greenspan, and Clinton (initiated by Greenspan) came at an opportune moment in history. This is not denigrate it's success, but to add perspective. By most measurements,btw, the economy is pretty good.
c) hate- Clinton has been under attack from the right, especially the far right; by means both fair and foul - from Day One. You know that. Of course he retaliated, get a grip. Say two words aloud for me: 'Newt Gingrich'. Do the words have a certain resonance? I find that Gingrich, and Clinton, are morally identical; which does not say much for either. To be plain, your anger ( as was mine ) is misdirected. Much of what bothers you is not Democratic, sorry. A politican (say, oh i don't know, Nixon) is a politician (Clinton) is a politician (Ginrich), get the point?
d) "mutually exclusive" -yes, that's what Nixon did as well. Clever politics, but it usually results in bad policy
e) "Bush recovery"??? as i said, presidents do not have that kind of power. There are a number of forces behind this period of economic growth; but politics has almost nothing to do with it.
f) "positive culture" what i was trying to get at was that we have never had a 'positive culture'. Corruption, dirty politics, war, slavery,
the use of the military against civilians, these are the things our history
is made of. And those things i have mentioned do not even scratch the surface, there is much, much, more.
You know, my liberal friends say i'm conservative; and my conservative friends say i'm a liberal. Oh well. Would like to leave you with one thought, your anger will betray you. Best wishes
My anger? My anger? Care to reread your posts? It's dripping with latent heat.I didn't say McCarthy's actions were appropriate. I did say he that his suspicions were valid. Big difference. And, exposing espionage is always a good idea, or is only acertain free speech allowed?
hate- you're right 'Newt Gingrich' has been under attack from the left, especially the far left; by means both fair and foul - from Day One. You know that. But, that wasn't the point & you know that too. The point was to shed some light on this hero of yours. And, before you defensively retaliate as if Newt was my hero, I already know his failings & I'm not exactly a afan of anybody these days. I just thought some indisputable facts were in order.
BTW, I'm don't belong to any political party since I find them an unnecessary evil. Personnally, I love to see Alan Keyes in office, but reality makes me want a run off between Bush & Bradley. But I fear the special interests will get McCain (Gore light) to run against the left-wing annointed Gore. Thus, making Gore win without even really running in the primary (as the elections are cancelled in Bradley states).
Abuse of the subjects with military probably predates Machiavelli too. I was putting things into current context. What oligarchist countries do this? Monarchies (not on really on spectrum) & Communist & Marxist.
Communism <- Marxist <- Democratic Republic -> Libertarian -> Anarchy You don't think that pre-Clinton had a more "positive culture" than the current rampant aversion to everyone & everything, as people don't know if they's going to be a company in which to work tomorrow?
If it wasn't a Bush recovery, what do call it when Clinton's illegal retro-active tax, immediately dropped Bush's 4% growth to 2% which only started to reatain 4% in the latter half of 1995, when federal spending was no longer exponentiating.
did I forget something? Oh, watch anything good lately?
hi,
time to end this. Couple of odd notes- when i asked if a Commie was free to make a movie, you spoke of espionage. Which did not answer the question. As you know, McCarthy had nothing to do with US counterespionage efforts. If he had any effect, he prob muddied the water. So that response fails to:
a) answer
or b) counter my implied argument
i remember the 50's, as do you, this to me is not an academic argument, and i am pretty sure you are willing to limit the freedoms of people you don't agree with. The question: is a Commie free?
was, and is, easy to answer either way.
this i had to respond to- i have never liked Clinton. These days if he comes on, i change the channel.
lastly, i am not a technical kind of guy, it took me quite a few years, and books, to come up with a basic understanding of economics.
Here are a couple of my favorites: "Cities and the Wealth of Nations" by Jane Jacobs - this is so good, i can hardly believe it. It is easy for your library to borrow a copy from other libraries ( if you have a small one ).
It is easy because it is quite popular, the U of Maine, for example, has 5 copies, one for each campus. "The Wheels of Commerce" by Fernand Braudel covers the rise of markets, and basic economies, in the 1500-1800's.
"The Rise and Fall of the Great Empires" by Paul Kennedy There are several others, but those are the books i truly learned from.
feel free to take the last shot, let me know if you read the Jacobs book ( discussing that book with someone who has just discovered it is a rare pleasure ). Best wishes
we were talking about government systems ...
Communism <- Marxist <- Democratic Republic -> Libertarian -> Anarchy & now we're talking economic systems ...
socialism <- fascism <- capitalism ... please stick to a single subject if you don't want to undermine your position.
==========
I spoke of espoinage because of the substantiated Soviet infiltration of Hollywood to be abused into a propoganda tool. So, I feel they're just as free to make a movie as I'm to expose their covert activities. Hope this helps ....
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
