Guest Posted July 20, 2001 Share Posted July 20, 2001 Originally posted by dansouth@yahoo.com: Winston Churchill was obese, alcoholic, and rarely got out of bed before noon. He also wrote a veritable library of books, including the definitive text on European history, gave some of history's most eloquent and arousing speeches, and managed to keep Britain from buckling under the strain of the Blitz long enough to serve as the launching pad for the greatest invasion in military history. In short, Churchill is the reason that the western world doesn't eat sauerkraut three times a day. Nevertheless his own people rejected him politically after all he did for them. And that brainyness linked with conservatism quote is still fatuous. Decades of political involvement have shown me that conservatism is a simplistic response to complicated issues, the opposite of intelligent thinking. Afterall, America's leading exponent of conservatism is famous for only using half his brain by his own account. Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lee Flier Posted July 20, 2001 Share Posted July 20, 2001 Originally posted by dansouth@yahoo.com: The government is good at appropriating funds for projects, but they're woefully bad at following up to ensure that the funds reach their intended recipients. Yes I agree, and that's why I don't think the government SHOULD be who gets to decide who receives help and how. It would be great if they didn't even collect the funds. But the whole reason they got involved with it in the first place is because the plutocracy that has always run things, never took it upon themselves to help people in need, which they could do with far less resources than what the government uses. But they don't. They try to squeeze people dry as much as they can get away with and then bitch about paying taxes for welfare programs. As for laziness, there's a big differnence between needing some short term help and neglecting to take care of oneself. Anyone can find themselves in a jam for reasons that are not of their own making - natural disaster, plant closing, unexpected pregnancy, etc. - and help should be avaialbe. But if the jam is cause by lack of planning or discipline or effort, then people who ARE working hard generally have a hard time with being asked to help out in those instances. It's difficult to spot the scammers, though, and that makes it difficult for those with legitimate needs to get assistance when it's needed. Yeah, and that's why I think assistance should be provided at the community level, not the federal or even state level. However, the plutocracy is doing its best to break up communities and make them into yet more faceless conglomerates made up mostly of people you don't know and who don't give a shit about you. Also, I don't think people who are "working hard" necessarily need to be convinced to help someone, even if that person might be perceived by a hardcore right-winger as "lazy", if they personally understand something about that person's value to the community. Sometimes an individual IS "working hard" but at something that is not likely to produce income - such as being a housewife/househusband, a parent, or an artist or scientist working in a noncommercial field. Many people might recognize the value of such an individual to society but have no idea how to support him or her. If it were a community effort, each person wouldn't have to sacrifice much in order to support the work of those who were non-income producing. But if it's left on the shoulders of a family or a few individuals, oftentimes someone like that is left with no support system. Often enough we see one-income families where say, the father is the breadwinner and they get a divorce, and the single mother is left without enough resources (even assuming the father pays child support) to support her own household without working. Then the children suffer by having two largely absent parents. Likewise, I think communities suffer by not having individuals they care about, whom they support for their contribution to the community as volunteers, artists, musicians, craftspeople and the like. You will never hear any of the above statements in a conservative or libertarian party platform. These people don't exist as far as they're concerned - either you contribute something to the bottom line or you're a lazy sod who doesn't deserve to eat. And if you complain about it you're a whining crybaby. Basically the message is that how much money you earn determines the entirety of your worth as a human being. Yarghh. --Lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dansouth Posted July 20, 2001 Share Posted July 20, 2001 Originally posted by jtegan@tiac.net: Decades of political involvement have shown me that conservatism is a simplistic response to complicated issues, the opposite of intelligent thinking. I agree that conservatives try to reduce complex situations to simple terms. However, I think that non-thinking is a problem for the left as much as it is for the right. Do you think that the communist Khmer Rouge forces that destroyed Cambodia really thought through what they were doing? Or were they simply caught up in nationwide histeria, blindly following the direction of Pol Pot and his lieutenants? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Originally posted by dansouth@yahoo.com: I agree that conservatives try to reduce complex situations to simple terms. However, I think that non-thinking is a problem for the left as much as it is for the right. Do you think that the communist Khmer Rouge forces that destroyed Cambodia really thought through what they were doing? Or were they simply caught up in nationwide histeria, blindly following the direction of Pol Pot and his lieutenants? Liberalism is not Communism. Indeed American liberals renounced Communism and Sociialism decades ago. The association of Liberalism, Communism and Socialism is a successful obfuscation by right wing PR efforts. Joe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr. rob Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Balance is whats important. I beleive in the need of government to set standards so that people arent exploited by corporations. Also I think saftey nets for the opressed, confused and mentaly ill are needed. Also, I beleive in public education. Fiscally conservatism is great if its reasonable, socially US conservatives scare me. Vote for me as your next president and I promise to inhale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pro Jules Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 "Why are so many musicians politically left-leaning?" Because they are all workshy soap dodgers? http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Jules ------------------ "The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." -- Hunter S. Thompson This message has been edited by Julian standen on 07-20-2001 at 09:08 PM Jules Producer Julian Standen London, UK, Come hang here! http://www.gearslutz.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeReverb Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 No, Liberalism is not Communism. Yet try to find a conservative to find anything nice to say about Castro. The Dems and other liberals see him as a misunderstood guy with a great health care plan. Too bad you can't leave the country if you feel like it. American Liberalism is quite close to Socialism - check the members of Congress who are registered Socialists: http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html In my opinion, Conservatism is a way of looking at problems and trying to solve them using rational thought -by thinking more than one level deep - past your initial emotions and feelings. Liberalism is a way of looking at problems and trying to solve them using feelings and emotions - the surface approach. It may feel good to say you are for affirmative action, for example, but once you get past assuaging your self-guilt, and you lose the emotional rush you get for appearing to "care", and the peer-approved 'enlightenment' you display for wanting to "right past wrongs" and "level the playing field" gets set aside and you actually SEE it for the discrimination that it is, you are headed towards the conservative viewpoint. Generally speaking, of course. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rold Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Originally posted by DeluxeReverb: It may feel good to say you are for affirmative action, for example, but once you get past assuaging your self-guilt, and you lose the emotional rush you get for appearing to "care", and the peer-approved 'enlightenment' you display for wanting to "right past wrongs" and "level the playing field" gets set aside and you actually SEE it for the discrimination that it is, you are headed towards the conservative viewpoint. Generally speaking, of course. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif In Canada (at least), that approach is a good reason in itself to avoid voting conservative. We just had a tainted water tragedy where one conservative premier's financial cutbacks and decisions killed seven people and sickened every last person in a town of thousands. No apology; he really doesn't "care". When he implemented these cutbacks, he obviously didn't "care"; he ignored the warnings from his backbenchers about what the potential implications were. That non-caring approach was directly responsible for these deaths and serious illnesses, and he didn't even offer a simple apology. This "look beyond the emotion and get down to the bottom line" approach is a damn good reason not to vote conservative, if you ask me. This message has been edited by rold on 07-20-2001 at 10:57 PM meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b3wiz Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Hey Lee, perhaps in your world conservatives don't care about the arts, but i gotta tell ya, it ain't that way here in PA. Even though most of the musicians and artists I know are liberal leaning, the local Republican committees are a big part of our bread and butter. We get lots of good paying gigs from them and they have done a great deal to promote the arts. They have done more for jazz back home than anyone ever has. Conversely, the Democratic party is always trying to recruit us "for the cause". This is not just my findings. Everyone I know who plays regularly around here has the same sentiments. I played 2 Dem related gigs in the past year and one took 5 months to get paid and the other is still pending. The Elephants paid on the spot every time, usually before the gig and usually with cash. Not only that, but most of these people have not proven to be the stereotypes many of you partisan hypocrits on this thread have made them out to be. And I have found that not only is the leftwinged stereotype of them twisted, but I have found many of these people to be involved in a lot of projects such as environmental cleanups, Habitat for Humanity, homeless centers etc, that the media likes to claim as liberal grounds. It has really been an eye opener for me. "Someone once put it well: "It is easier to go to one consistant extreme or another than to remain in the center of political tension". I am discovering that right wingers don't have a monopoly on bigotry. There is plenty of that on the left as well. I see a lot of it right on here. If we refuse to allow modification of our views when we are faced with facts that challenge those views, we not only begin living a lie, but we also close our minds, the very thing which is the essence of true liberalism. I don't feel as though I have left liberalism. Compared to 30 years ago, it has left me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rold Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Originally posted by b3wiz: Not only that, but most of these people have not proven to be the stereotypes many of you partisan hypocrits on this thread have made them out to be. That's funny: both times I was on tours that passed through PA, there was only one type of people I remember coming across: conservative religious types. Do I need to ask which side of the political fence they sit on? Sorry - had to be said... http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif This message has been edited by rold on 07-23-2001 at 02:53 PM meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b3wiz Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 guess I made my point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chip McDonald Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Originally posted by jtegan@tiac.net: The association of Liberalism, Communism and Socialism is a successful obfuscation by right wing PR efforts. Truth, 10 pts. ------------------ New and Improved Music Soon: http://www.mp3.com/chipmcdonald Guitar Lessons in Augusta Georgia: www.chipmcdonald.com Eccentric blog: https://chipmcdonaldblog.blogspot.com/ / "big ass windbag" - Bruce Swedien Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeReverb Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Since I don't have any facts of your poisoned water story other than your blatantly biased sketch, I can't comment on your vague and anecdotal example of "don't vote conservative because a non-caring conservative guy poisoned the water and didn't even apologise". Not very persuasive, I'm afraid. I wonder what is it with liberals and apologies? They seem to continually demand them AND offer them on behalf of everyone (as self-appointed spokesmen) at the drop of the hat. Apologies are for people with hurt feelings - see, we're still talking about the feelings level. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rold Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 There's no other way to take that story: someone decided to make major funding cuts in a sensitive area despite the risks he was *warned* about, 7 people died, thousands were sickened. He's at fault - a court of law is proving that as we speak. Typical of someone who happens to be on the conservative side of the fence. The last right wing PM we've had approved NAFTA, now we can't even deny toxic waste being shipped up from the US without being sued. We can't even afford to deal with being sued by the US - NAFTA decreased the value of our dollar (compared to the US) 40 fucking percent! Do you think he *cares* about seeing his own country get flooded with american toxic waste? Probably not - it made him rich. Point me to something good conservative leaders have done not related to boosting their PR, the holy dollar, or introducing/reinforcing the redneck values that those lunatics do, and I *might* re-evaluate my stance on conservative politics. Harold BTW - you have a murdering redneck running your country. How do you *feel* about that? Or are *feelings* too much to ask? This message has been edited by rold on 07-21-2001 at 02:58 AM meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EWF Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Originally posted by DeluxeReverb: No, Liberalism is not Communism. Yet try to find a conservative to find anything nice to say about Castro. The Dems and other liberals see him as a misunderstood guy with a great health care plan. Too bad you can't leave the country if you feel like it. In my opinion, Conservatism is a way of looking at problems and trying to solve them using rational thought -by thinking more than one level deep - past your initial emotions and feelings. Liberalism is a way of looking at problems and trying to solve them using feelings and emotions - the surface approach. Yet, many conservatives have some of the most irrational thoughts. Most people I know, whether conservative or liberal, don't use feelings or emotions to solve problems. Both types think more than one level deep. Both types look past their initial emotions and feelings. It's how they react to those feelings that is different. I don't know too many Americans, whether conservative or liberal who particularly like Castro, so isn't that a bit too much of a generalization? So many people here say, "It would be great if the government did this..." or "The government shouldn't do this..." or "Politics is ..." Our political system is perhaps the greatest in the world. The fact that you are even free to say all these things should indicate this to you. Go to another country in Europe, the Middle East, or the Far East and stay there for awhile. You probably won't come back here feeling the same way. We are all so spoiled on what the United States represents. Complain, complain, complain because you can't see the bigger picture. Even with all the government intervention so many of you complain about, we have by far more freedom than virtually any other country in the world. Why do you think so many people want to immigrate here? There is no such thing as a political system that will make everyone happy. All the complaints here mean the government is working the way it is supposed to. The dissatisfaction is just a negative byproduct, that does not change the fact that our system of checks and balances was a cleverly thought-up system devised by our founding fathers - Moderate views shared by many will come to the fore, while extreme, non-centrist viewpoints will tend to be replaced by more middle-of-the-road versions. Don't complain about it. Even though it's hard to do since we all take our freedom for granted, embrace the government that allows you to rant the way you want, when you want, without being sent to prison or being shot to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rold Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Originally posted by EWF: Don't complain about it. Even though it's hard to do since we all take our freedom for granted, embrace the government that allows you to rant the way you want, when you want, without being sent to prison or being shot to death. Freedom? You can't walk North America's streets without having at least $11 in your pocket without threat of being fined for vagrancy. Argue with the cop and you'll find yourself locked up - just happened to a good friend of mine a couple of months ago in DC. (She happened to have over $15 000 in her bank account.) Freedom to rant? Try that against a corporation. Rant loud enough and you'll find yourself on the defence seat for "defamation of character". Welcome to America, Inc. As for the lack of threat in being imprisoned, try being a minority in the US: Probability of imprisonment: Black 39% Hispanic 18% White 4% (source: Amnesty International) In terms of being shot, The Seattle Weekly reported during the week of June 12: 14 black men have been shot by police during the past year. 2 were armed with a weapon. This may not be Communist China, but I certainly wouldn't call it free.. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gif meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
- Posted July 21, 2001 Author Share Posted July 21, 2001 Originally posted by DeluxeReverb: I wonder what is it with liberals and apologies? They seem to continually demand them AND offer them on behalf of everyone (as self-appointed spokesmen) at the drop of the hat. Apologies are for people with hurt feelings - see, we're still talking about the feelings level. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Hey -- maybe that's the connection between musicians and left wing ideologies... the "feeling" aspect of it? Both are important to being a musician or having a left-wing ideology, it seems. This message has been edited by popmusic on 07-21-2001 at 08:00 AM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Originally posted by DeluxeReverb: No, Liberalism is not Communism. Yet try to find a conservative to find anything nice to say about Castro. The Dems and other liberals see him as a misunderstood guy with a great health care plan. Too bad you can't leave the country if you feel like it. American Liberalism is quite close to Socialism - check the members of Congress who are registered Socialists: http://www.dsausa.org/dsa.html Two can play this game. Timothy McVeigh is a conservative and a self described Libertarian. Quotes taken out of context from Salon Magazine: "There is a common ideological thread that runs from Timothy McVeigh to bedrock Republicanism, "It's difficult not to conclude that the difference between McVeigh and those zealous Christians who murder abortion doctors, for example, is one more of degree than of kind." "Timothy McVeigh would most likely have existed even if America's mainstream conservatives did not preach a gospel disturbingly similar to his." http://www.salon.com/books/2001/04/07/mcveigh/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffstenn Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 To get back to the original basis of the question of this thread (rather than continue commenting on the nature of politics in the US)..... .....I am sure that I was born with my musical abilities, and the "vision" of the world as I see it....not learned, not "nurture" as the basis for either.... ....I am "Left-leaning" because it is that view that sees humans as all "ONE," and that we should all be supporting rather than competing with each other, because we're all in the same boat. ....the music just comes with the package. ....of course, now the question begs to be asked about "types" of music, because the Republican Ramone or (who's the archer that kills his own food again?)...type of music is not what I hear in my head..... ...the "Left" makes "happy" music while the "Right" makes angry..? http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rold Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Originally posted by jtegan@tiac.net: http://www.salon.com/books/2001/04/07/mcveigh/ I think this book is going to make a damn good read! The one quote you pasted above deserves extension: "There is a common ideological thread that runs from Timothy McVeigh to bedrock Republicanism, and the shared emotional leitmotif of that ideology is anger. What distinguishes America's worst domestic terrorist from Newt Gingrich, Tom DeLay and George W. Bush is the intensity of that anger. McVeigh and his fellow extremists burn with rage, are consumed and obsessed by it. They are the pathological white-hot center of the right wing. Radiating out from that center, next come the extreme conservatives, the rabid Clinton-haters and Bible-thumping doomsayers, the angry zealots for whom business-as-usual Republicanism is too moderate -- the group normally thought of as the true-believer Republican "base." After this suburb, you cross the city limits into mainstream conservative territory -- and the distinction between the city and the suburb is pretty blurred." Thanks for posting that man... http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Harold meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tedster Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Took a basic Criminology class at Florida State. Required reading was a book called "The Rich Get Richer While the Poor Get...Prison". While I agree with some of the book's premises...one sentence stood out: "Who gets prison terms? Those POOR criminals"...phrased exactly that way...taking the economic connotation out and playing on a sympathy issue. The whole class was aimed at saying we're all basically criminals, but that the only ones who pay for it are the poor folks who can't afford proper legal counsel. The whole course was aimed at trying to "level the playing field"...make everyone feel guilty about all the parking tickets they've had and equate that to larceny, auto theft, and such. The course was aimed at separating "crime" (theft) from the type of crime we fear most...violence, murder, rape, armed robbery, etc. So, according to this course, there are no real criminals, just misunderstood folks who can't be held accountable for their actions. Someone steals a car...it's not their fault...it's OUR fault. Someone sells drugs...it's not their fault, it's OUR fault. Accountability. The root of the problem. Then, the "poor" man who made one little mistake, and the "poor" guy has to have it follow him around..."that's not fair"...he raped a seven year old girl...and now he's "better". The prison psychologist even says so. He wants to move into your neighborhood. You happen to have a seven year old daughter. Which is more important, his "right to privacy", or you and your family's right to safety? Never mind that the little girl he raped will be emotionally scarred for life. That "poor" man's rights are important, no? My point? Q: "What's the definition of a conservative?" A: "A liberal who has been mugged." This message has been edited by Tedster on 07-21-2001 at 01:50 PM "Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeReverb Posted July 21, 2001 Share Posted July 21, 2001 Rold- Sorry, still don't have any facts, just your spin, so I can't comment on the poison water case. I guess everybody he "poisoned" was a liberal, so he didn't lose any votes, right? You may need to read a bit more about the conservative viewpoint, since you can't seem to talk about it without name-calling and screeching. I'm not saying they are no asshole conservatives, just puzzled as to why some asshole conservatives are carefully selected by the Left ( or at least you) to represent "the conservative mindset"...that's a weak argument at best. Ted Kaczinski(sp?), the famed Unabomber, was a left-winger...so what. That hardly makes Tom Daschle a kindred spirit, does it? I can't really report on how Ted Bundy voted, or Jeffery Dahmer, but what's the point? I *can* argue that McVeigh would not have "existed" (seems he would have been born no matter what, but I'll play along), had the federal government not attacked private citizens and killed them. Perhaps if the Branch Davidians had been Black, McVeigh would be another Mumia. McVeigh had a point, the intrusion of the federal government into citizen's rights and privacy was a grievous tactical error, but his mentally-ill solution cannot be defended from any angle, and no conservatives that I know do so. How many Christians are there in the U.S.? How many mentally-ill people calling themselves Christians have killed abortion doctors? Your anecdotal examples in an attempt to color millions by the actions of a few are pointless. I suggest you read some of Thomas Sowell's articles at Jewish World Review (oh my god , a Black conservative economist!), Jonah Goldberg (oh my god, a Jewish conservative with a sense of humor!), and perhaps even David Horowitz (oh my god, a former liberal Jewish conservative!). Quote me the figures for Black-on-Black crime in relation to percentage of population. How about Black-on-White crime? How many of the "shot by police" Blacks were criminals engaged in criminal activity? All of them, I suspect, but your figures don't reveal any facts regarding the circumstances. If you think all conservatives are similar to your far-left fanatical examples of "evil conservatives", you are simply wrong. If you want to be less wrong in the future, you may choose to do a bit more research, if only for the purpose of "knowing thine enemy". http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rold Posted July 22, 2001 Share Posted July 22, 2001 Originally posted by DeluxeReverb: Rold- Sorry, still don't have any facts, just your spin, so I can't comment on the poison water case. I guess everybody he "poisoned" was a liberal, so he didn't lose any votes, right? Read it for yourself: http://www.canoe.ca/EcoliTragedy/home.html I'd imagine a good part of the population in Walkerton was conservative - they'd have to be, that premier was elected twice. Maybe they should've thought twice instead - that tragedy could have been avoided. Ted Kaczinski(sp?), the famed Unabomber, was a left-winger...so what. That hardly makes Tom Daschle a kindred spirit, does it? I can't really report on how Ted Bundy voted, or Jeffery Dahmer, but what's the point? I *can* argue that McVeigh would not have "existed" (seems he would have been born no matter what, but I'll play along), had the federal government not attacked private citizens and killed them. It's a given that there are psychos on both sides of the board. With Mcveigh, there are millions of him all over north america, with different faces and different levels of anger and breaking points. Perhaps if the Branch Davidians had been Black, McVeigh would be another Mumia. McVeigh had a point, the intrusion of the federal government into citizen's rights and privacy was a grievous tactical error, but his mentally-ill solution cannot be defended from any angle, and no conservatives that I know do so. You can hardly equate Mumia to McVeigh. Mumia is a police and racism critic, not a terrorist. As for the government intruding on people's citizen's rights and privacy - it happens every single day. Hardly a reason to blow up a building. Protest maybe, but mass execution is a weee bit extreme, if you ask me. I agree with you on no one on either side of the fence backing that one up - can't see how it can be defended at all. How many Christians are there in the U.S.? How many mentally-ill people calling themselves Christians have killed abortion doctors? Well, I can only comment on what I've experienced, seen and read. Quote me the figures for Black-on-Black crime in relation to percentage of population. How about Black-on-White crime? How many of the "shot by police" Blacks were criminals engaged in criminal activity? All of them, I suspect, but your figures don't reveal any facts regarding the circumstances. Sorry, I don't have the facts on those circumstances, but I'd imagine the lack of equality probably has quite a bit to do with the quick trigger- fingers. As for stats on Black-on-White crime, I wouldn't be at all suprised if it equalled White-on-Black crime. If you think all conservatives are similar to your far-left fanatical examples of "evil conservatives", you are simply wrong. I wouldn't exactly say I'm fanatical - you don't see me blowing up buildings or churches or hosting a talk show on how evil the government is. Secondly, I don't think ALL conservatives are as nasty as the examples I have listed, but I have had FAR more negative experiences with those people than I have had with left wingers. Harold This message has been edited by rold on 07-21-2001 at 08:36 PM meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeReverb Posted July 22, 2001 Share Posted July 22, 2001 Rold: "Well, I can only comment on what I've experienced, seen and read." Where have you experienced, seen or read that there are millions of Tim McVeigh's in America? Rold:"BTW - you have a murdering redneck running your country." Where have you experienced, seen or read that President Bush is a murdering redneck? Rold: "Freedom? You can't walk North America's streets without having at least $11 in your pocket without threat of being fined for vagrancy" Where have you experienced, seen, or read that you can't walk in NORTH AMERICA (I guess that includes Canada) without having at least $11 (American, preferably) in your pocket without threat of being fined for vagrancy? Rold:"You can hardly equate Mumia to McVeigh. Mumia is a police and racism critic, not a terrorist." No, Mumia is a cop killer. McVeigh was a civilian AND a cop killer, too. Mumia's "causes", as you claim, are to be a "critic" of "police and racism". McVeigh's motive was disgust with what he cnsidered an intrusive federal government. Both are murderers, both deserve(d) their punishment. That's how I can equate them. Rold: "As for the government intruding on people's citizen's rights and privacy - it happens every single day" And it remains wrong every single day it happens. McVeigh's deranged solution to a real problem does not make the problem palatable, or disappear. His political affiliation (which I take your word for)has no reflection on others with the same conservative view. ************************************************************************ Here are some actual facts for you regarding crime and race in America: According to the latest US Department of Justice survey of crime victims, more than 6.6 million violent crimes (murder, rape, assault and robbery) are committed in the US each year, of which about 20 per cent, or 1.3 million, are interracial crimes. * Most victims of race crime - about 90 percent - are white, according to the survey "Highlights from 20 Years of Surveying Crime Victims", published in 1993. * Almost 1 million white Americans were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by black Americans in 1992, compared with about 132,000 blacks who were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by whites, according to the same survey. * Blacks thus committed 7.5 times more violent interracial crimes than whites even though the black population is only one-seventh the size of the white population. When these figures are adjusted on a per capita basis, they reveal an extraordinary disparity: blacks are committing more than 50 times the number of violent racial crimes of whites. * According to the latest annual report on murder by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, most interracial murders involve black assailants and white victims, with blacks murdering whites at 18 times the rate that whites murder blacks. ************************************************************************ Where does your "lack of equality" theory fit in with the above data? Rold:"Secondly, I don't think ALL conservatives are as nasty as the examples I have listed, but I have had FAR more negative experiences with those people than I have had with left wingers. ." That's probably because you are a left-winger, or at least left-leaning. I can say the opposite and be as correct as you are, from my viewpoint. I don't, however, since it tends to make me appear close-minded and unable to show respect for opposing political viewpoints. Thanks for the water poison link. I'll take a look at it. BTW, if you plan on getting your info from Salon.com, at least read David Horowitz for balance!!! p.s.Sorry for the odd quotations, I don't know how to do the HTML thing...! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rold Posted July 22, 2001 Share Posted July 22, 2001 Originally posted by DeluxeReverb: Where have you experienced, seen or read that there are millions of Tim McVeigh's in America? I mean people with Tim's opinions, not his actions - intolerant, fed up with the government. Where have you experienced, seen or read that President Bush is a murdering redneck? Didn't he happen to approve America's largest amount of executions through Capital Punishment? Where have you experienced, seen, or read that you can't walk in NORTH AMERICA (I guess that includes Canada) without having at least $11 (American, preferably) in your pocket without threat of being fined for vagrancy? I can't remember the exact source of this info in print, but I have read about that existing quite a few years ago. Plus, my friend was charged with this, so, taking her word on what happened, it must exist, if at least in DC. I'll try and remember the printed source; if I can, I'll get it to you. No, Mumia is a cop killer. McVeigh was a civilian AND a cop killer, too. Mumia's "causes", as you claim, are to be a "critic" of "police and racism". McVeigh's motive was disgust with what he cnsidered an intrusive federal government. Both are murderers, both deserve(d) their punishment. That's how I can equate them. Under what circumstances did Mumia commit murder? Was he acting in self defence? Police brutality is no myth. If I were attacked by a cop, I too would defend myself. I really don't have enough details on what the circumstances were in that case. Either way, killing one person and blowing up a building full of people is murder on a different scale, IMO. In any case, racism plays a significant role in the way police, for one, handle "justice". http://web.amnesty.org/802568F7005C4453/0/133746465C2D34CA8025690000692D98!O pen&Highlight=2,racism Here are some actual facts for you regarding crime and race in America: * Most victims of race crime - about 90 percent - are white, according to the survey "Highlights from 20 Years of Surveying Crime Victims", published in 1993. Are there any more recent figures? Quite a lot of things have changed since 93. * Almost 1 million white Americans were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by black Americans in 1992, compared with about 132,000 blacks who were murdered, robbed, assaulted or raped by whites, according to the same survey. * Blacks thus committed 7.5 times more violent interracial crimes than whites even though the black population is only one-seventh the size of the white population. When these figures are adjusted on a per capita basis, they reveal an extraordinary disparity: blacks are committing more than 50 times the number of violent racial crimes of whites. What I have experienced is where there's poverty, lack of proper (equally accesible)education, and/or discrimination, there's crime. Blacks have historically, and still today, been/are the underdog. Where there's discrimination, there's violence too. How would you feel and react if you woke up every day knowing you were climbing an uphill battle just because of your skin colour? If it were me, I'd be pretty edgy - possibly violent. If you wish to relate that information to discrimination in regards to crime and the death penalty, here's a good read: http://web.amnesty.org/802568F7005C4453/0/73ADE850D1562E3A8025690000693235!O pen&Highlight=2,racism * According to the latest annual report on murder by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, most interracial murders involve black assailants and white victims, with blacks murdering whites at 18 times the rate that whites murder blacks. ************************************************************************ Where does your "lack of equality" theory fit in with the above data?. Here's another: http://web.amnesty.org/802568F7005C4453/0/A3DD42FEE6FE143D802569000068A308!O pen&Highlight=2,racism One thing I have to mention though: sorry I'm not replying to your posts with detailed data; I not only have a 6 month old son to look after, but I'm also preparing my studio plan to be looked over by a designer next week. I simply don't have the time. If you wish to open up to the fact that racism and injustice is rampant throughout the US, look into those links and read with an open mind. Thanks, Harold This message has been edited by rold on 07-22-2001 at 01:15 AM meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeReverb Posted July 22, 2001 Share Posted July 22, 2001 I know the feeling of looking after a child....wears me out...good luck. And good luck on your studio...keep us posted. I suppose I could address your points one-by-one, but suffice it to say: Mumia killed a cop, NOT in self defense, as several juries and appeals have decided over and over. People can choose to not be criminals, no matter how little education, household income, or skin color. Racism is where you find it. It certainly exists, among people of all skin colors, but lately it has become a catch-all excuse for every failure and foible of some Black Americans and their leadership. Shoot a cop: he was racist. Grades not good enough to get into college: racist admittance policies. When will Dr. King's words come true for the Black community? I DO judge everyone by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. Would that some Blacks could do the same... Thanks for the discussion, although we don't agree, it was a thought-provoking session. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rold Posted July 22, 2001 Share Posted July 22, 2001 Originally posted by DeluxeReverb: Thanks for the discussion, although we don't agree, it was a thought-provoking session. Thank *you*.. http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif I suppose, in Lee's words: "we could agree to disagree". I'll drop it for the time being and we can at least carry on with our own responsibilities and focus on them instead of trying to fix politics and society in general. Great talk! Peace, Harold meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Middle Man Posted July 22, 2001 Share Posted July 22, 2001 Great Thread.. Interestingly enough I just finished reading the new book by David McCullough, "John Adams". During his term as president Mr. Adams expressed his concern over the way the new govenrment was turning into a 2 party system. This was of great concern and he felt that this would ruin the wholed premise that our government was based on. Turns our that Jefferson and Hamilton were somewhat responsible for shaping us into a 2 party system. It's sad that the interests of us working stiffs is rarely represented in DC. I am pretty dissolusioned with all of these parties serving the interests of their wealthy leaders at the expense of the general public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rold Posted July 22, 2001 Share Posted July 22, 2001 Originally posted by philgrab@pacbell.net: It's sad that the interests of us working stiffs is rarely represented in DC. I am pretty dissolusioned with all of these parties serving the interests of their wealthy leaders at the expense of the general public. 100 000 protesters are in Genoa, Italy this weekend marching and protesting against that same approach you are dissolusioned by. 50 000 people did the same in Seattle, 25 000 in Ottawa, and now 100 000 people in Genoa. It doesn't matter where we are all in the world, we're all threatened by the same thing: the multinationals and world banks owning and running our planet and our lives. America, Inc. is pushing to become Planet Earth, Inc., and *everyone* is at serious risk of losing whatever is left of our freedom, individual and cultural identities, financial independence, and any further word in the health of our physical and social environment. I have seen it happen: Canada cannot even deny the shipping of US toxic waste into our provinces without threat of being sued - which we can't afford thanks to the destruction of our economy thanks to a much smaller similar merger (NAFTA). I, for one, have no interest in becoming an employee or an assett of this new global corporation, and I fully understand where you're coming from. Harold http://adbusters.org/home/ meh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeluxeReverb Posted July 22, 2001 Share Posted July 22, 2001 I know the feeling of looking after a child....wears me out...good luck. And good luck on your studio...keep us posted. I suppose I could address your points one-by-one, but suffice it to say: Mumia killed a cop, NOT in self defense, as several juries and appeals have decided over and over. People can choose to not be criminals, no matter how little education, household income, or skin color. Racism is where you find it. It certainly exists, among people of all skin colors, but lately it has become a catch-all excuse for every failure and foible of some Black Americans and their leadership. Shoot a cop: he was racist. Grades not good enough to get into college: racist admittance policies. When will Dr. King's words come true for the Black community? I DO judge everyone by the content of their character, not the color of their skin. Would that some Blacks could do the same... Thanks for the discussion, although we don't agree, it was a thought-provoking session. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.