LawTalkers
Page 63 of 126 « First 13536162 63 646573113 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Waiting for Fitzgerald (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=704)

Secret_Agent_Man 10-10-2005 03:53 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
You are talking like you are part of the deluded left that at first embraced Stalin and then when they realized how horrible things went you tried to argue that what happaned was because Stalin was insane and deluded and what happened was not the logical extension of the communist philosophy.
It is when you post like this that you are at your most offensive.
[I'd say, any other comments, pro or con?]

I just said that I don't think Stalin truly believed that the needs of the many outweighed the needs of the few. I am of the opinion that he was (among other things) opportunistic, power-hungry, and quite a bit megalomaniacal. OTOH, as Bilmore argued, he may also (or instead) have been a true believer.

Go fuck yourself.

S_A_M

ETA: I am not and have never been even a socialist, much less a communist, but I have to say this: The Soviet Union was not "the logical extension of the communist philosophy" any more that the U.S.A. is "the logical extension" of the writings of John Locke.

Gattigap 10-10-2005 03:55 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
It is when you post like this that you are at your most offensive.
[I'd say, any other comments, pro or con?]
Fair assessment, but at least the post didn't also say that you needed to Pay Attention.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 03:58 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
Fair assessment, but at least the post didn't also say that you needed to Pay Attention.
PoPD tag team. Impressive.

Gattigap 10-10-2005 04:02 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
PoPD tag team. Impressive.
Oh, for God's sake, stop punting with this. You're phoning it in more pathetically than Alan Arkin in Glengarry, Glen Ross.

From its use, I'm guessing that "PoPD" is Penskespeak for "you meanie!"

Sidd Finch 10-10-2005 04:07 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
No, actually I wasn't. Re-read the original post S_A_M responded to. Why when I don't direct comments to you do you internalise and personalise them and when I do you blatantly lie or otherwise distort where I am directing them?????????????
Why are you incapable of detecting obvious sarcasm? Is it the film of shit that coats your eyes?

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 04:07 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
Oh, for God's sake, stop punting with this. You're phoning it in more pathetically than Alan Arkin in Glengarry, Glen Ross.

From its use, I'm guessing that "PoPD" is Penskespeak for "you meanie!"
It's "Politics of Personal Destruction". My anti-bias, tolerant hate-free philosophy just doesn't understand why the invective has to be so personalised. You can disagree with him without the personal disparagement and "fuck yous", the latter of which seem to be the comeback of choice here and/or irl from the lefties. Are you guys that bereft of substantive reply that "fuck you" or other like hate-speech is all that there is?

SAd. I imagine FDR is spinning in his grave.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 04:11 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Why are you incapable of detecting obvious sarcasm? Is it the film of shit that coats your eyes?
Because, as an mod, I look at the html code behind your post and didn't see [sarcasm] [/sarcasm] brackets. I regret the misunderstanding.

"Film of shit"? Gatti, this is not PoPD how? Is this a reference to the fact that I have (shite) brown eyes?!?!?!

Forgetting for a second that such a reference is outable, and uncool as such, Sidd, I am compelled to ask, are you biased against people with brown eyes?

Bias and hate: Not cool.

Spanky 10-10-2005 04:24 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I am barely tuned into this discussion (when did the "P" in "PB" come to stand for Philosophy?), but this statement caught my eye.



Would you say the same about Saddam Hussein? Qaddafi? Castro?


Under your neo-con philosophy, assuming we could have invaded the USSR without triggering a nuclear war, would we have been justified in doing so to prevent the carnage that Stalin wreaked? Should we have told Patton to go for it, back in '45?

Yes. Patton should have gone it because we knew we were getting the bomb. Once we had the bomb and they didn't we should have told Stalin to hold free elections or face annihilation. It would have saved hundreds of millions of lives that were killed by Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh and Pol Pot.

bilmore 10-10-2005 04:24 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
It is when you post like this that you are at your most offensive.
[I'd say, any other comments, pro or con?]
To be fair, this was the reaction of the hard-core neo-socialists here back then as word of the excesses (like, the first eight million were just statistics, but the REST, you know, was excess . . .) filtered out. There was a lot of support voiced for the humanitarian system of socialism, and Stalin was initially framed as the benevolent father of that meritorious movement, and thus a lot of resistance to the idea that he might be . . . ya know . . . icky.

I think the NYT still hangs a Pulitzer devoted to this theme.

bilmore 10-10-2005 04:27 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
It's "Politics of Personal Destruction".
Damn. I thought it meant "Pick on Penske day."

sgtclub 10-10-2005 04:27 PM
One Down, One to Go
 
First female German Chancellor

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/051010/1/3vjhr.html

Chirac is next

Sidd Finch 10-10-2005 04:27 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
Yes. Patton should have gone it because we knew we were getting the bomb. Once we had the bomb and they didn't we should have told Stalin to hold free elections or face annihilation. It would have saved hundreds of millions of lives that were killed by Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh and Pol Pot.

Nothing like democracy imposed at the threat of nuclear annihilation.

Should we do that with the entire mideast, too? (Elections today, or nuclear war tomorrow!)

Sidd Finch 10-10-2005 04:28 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
It is when you post like this that you are at your most offensive.
[I'd say, any other comments, pro or con?]
Mild con -- at least when the discussion is about Stalin, etc., Spanky doesn't resort to his classic "stories about people I hob-nob with as a substitute for analytical thought" routine.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 04:28 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
Yes. Patton should have gone it because we knew we were getting the bomb. Once we had the bomb and they didn't we should have told Stalin to hold free elections or face annihilation. It would have saved hundreds of millions of lives that were killed by Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh and Pol Pot.
2. FDR should have stepped down. He was too sick to govern/lead near the end. Instead he put his interests above those of the country's and took a fourth term, and then promptly sold the eastern bloc and Soviet peoples down the river of oppression and tyranny for the next 40-50 plus years.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 04:30 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
To be fair, this was the reaction of the hard-core neo-socialists here back then as word of the excesses (like, the first eight million were just statistics, but the REST, you know, was excess . . .) filtered out. There was a lot of support voiced for the humanitarian system of socialism, and Stalin was initially framed as the benevolent father of that meritorious movement, and thus a lot of resistance to the idea that he might be . . . ya know . . . icky.

I think the NYT still hangs a Pulitzer devoted to this theme.
Yes, right next to the one that they got for Jayson Blair. Paper of record indeed.

bilmore 10-10-2005 04:30 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Nothing like democracy imposed at the threat of nuclear annihilation.
How do you "impose" democracy? At worst, if you're really "imposing" something, they simply vote for the status quo, and you walk away, right?

Or, are they really just incapable of self-rule?

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 04:31 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Damn. I thought it meant "Pick on Penske day."
Assuming "day" in the perpetual sense, that works too.

Spanky 10-10-2005 04:31 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
It is when you post like this that you are at your most offensive.
[I'd say, any other comments, pro or con?]

I just said that I don't think Stalin truly believed that the needs of the many outweighed the needs of the few. I am of the opinion that he was (among other things) opportunistic, power-hungry, and quite a bit megalomaniacal. OTOH, as Bilmore argued, he may also (or instead) have been a true believer.

Go fuck yourself.

S_A_M

ETA: I am not and have never been even a socialist, much less a communist, but I have to say this: The Soviet Union was not "the logical extension of the communist philosophy" any more that the U.S.A. is "the logical extension" of the writings of John Locke.
When you combine Scientific materialism and dictatorship of the prolitariate all communist atrocities that followed were forseable. When you have an elite that has full dictatorial power and believes that there are no "natural rights" and they must engineer society to increase the material benefits to all and it is OK to sacrifice individuals for the common good, that is a recipe for mass slaughter.

When you like at human beings as cells of the state body politics there will always be lots of cancerous cells that need to be exterminated.

It is only when each cell has rights that are given by a higher power (as opposed to other cells) that there is no excuse to liquidate cells for the common good.

Lenin, the first communist ruler, instituted mass liquidations, concentration camps and a complete suspension of all civil liberties. This was all perfectly aligned with communist philosophy and every communist ruler since just followed his lead. The result: hundreds of millions of executions. In other words more people intentionally killed by their own government that are alive in the whole United States today.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 04:33 PM
One Down, One to Go
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
First female German Chancellor

http://sg.news.yahoo.com/051010/1/3vjhr.html

Chirac is next
Once again the forces of freedom and democracy have outlasted the power of the soreloserman strategy.

PTL!

Gattigap 10-10-2005 04:35 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
You can disagree with him without the personal disparagement and "fuck yous", the latter of which seem to be the comeback of choice here and/or irl from the lefties. Are you guys that bereft of substantive reply that "fuck you" or other like hate-speech is all that there is?
If you could point out where my post included either of those things, I'd appreciate it. Otherwise, I must continue to conclude that PoPD = "you meanie!" Thanks.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 04:36 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Nothing like democracy imposed at the threat of nuclear annihilation.

Should we do that with the entire mideast, too? (Elections today, or nuclear war tomorrow!)

Yes.

http://www.sacredcowburgers.com/paro...g_globally.jpg

Gattigap 10-10-2005 04:36 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account


"Film of shit"? Gatti, this is not PoPD how?
You mean it's not a general reference to your ouevre? Whoa, my bad.

Spanky 10-10-2005 04:40 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Mild con -- at least when the discussion is about Stalin, etc., Spanky doesn't resort to his classic "stories about people I hob-nob with as a substitute for analytical thought" routine.
Each nulcear bomb that we dropped on Russia would have killed maybe - 150,000. I think Hiroshima was about 100,000 and Nagasaki was 80,000. I will be generous and say 500,000 if we really targeted them well. Stalin killed that many people for breakfast.

He killed over two million returning prisoners of war. Then he started deporting everyone that "helped" the Germans. That was pretty much every minority. He deported, I think four million Crimean Tatars, over half of who died. Between 45 and 48 Stalin moved millions of people around the European map like they were chess pieces (a large percentage of whom died in the process). And then he got down to extermination. Even twenty atom bombs would have seemed like a tea party compared to what was about to happen.

The Byelorussians, the Ukrainians and the baltic people all welcomes the Nazis as liberators. We could have at least told Stalin to get the hell out of those countries. We had the bomb. He didn't. We were definitely in a position to dictate terms.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 04:41 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
If you could point out where my post included either of those things, I'd appreciate it. Otherwise, I must continue to conclude that PoPD = "you meanie!" Thanks.
It was personal disparagement of Spanky's writing style, where he uses the phrase "Pay Attention", which he would not have to use if the libs would actually pay attention to what he writes. It was a form criticism bereft of substance. What part of that do you have trouble understanding?

bilmore 10-10-2005 04:42 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
You are talking like a member of the indoctrinated right that first believed Stalin was the embodiment of Capital C Communism that had to be defeated as an all-encompassing ideology and to be justified required subservience by the masses to the works of Karl Marx but also ignores the possibility that much of the people's subservience was possibly obtained not so much by ideology as by the crushing rule of a totalitarian regime focused on preserving its existence, which may be analogous in some ways to Baathist rule, which we'll leave aside for the moment because of potentially uncomfortable parallells to finding yourself arguing that some Iraqis actually bought in to Baathist ideology, such as it was, and didn't actually starve from the thirst for freedom that they would've seized years ago but for the iron hand of the Evil Fucker Saddam.
Did you do all that in one breath?

Actually, the Revolution was a completely popular one, brought about by the crushing brutality of life under the Tzars. Once the Whites were on their way out, there was to be a haggis in every pot, free land for all, and the opportunity to take whatever you wanted from anyone who had more then you. Pretty compelling for a populace that was slowly starving to death.

Point is, Stalin had loads of popular suppport. He was just good at figuring out what sections he could do without. And then, of course, acting on that knowledge.

Did you just call me Coltrane? 10-10-2005 04:44 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Point is, Stalin had loads of popular suppport. He was just good at figuring out what sections he could do without. And then, of course, acting on that knowledge.
This sounds familiar.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 04:47 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
You mean it's not a general reference to your ouevre? Whoa, my bad.
How would my general ouevre be a film of shit over my eyes? this makes no sense. And calling my general ouevre a film of shit is itself just a personally disparaging statement, as, obviously, the ideas I bring out here are representative, at least in part, of the thoughts, opinions and philosophies of a majority of the electorate. Do you ever wonder why the dims are out of power across the board at the Fed level and in a majority of the governor's houses?

bilmore 10-10-2005 04:52 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
This sounds familiar.
Yeah, and now his wife's running. Scary.

Spanky 10-10-2005 04:54 PM
1) Yes some regimes just rule for power alone. Saddam was one of them. He started out as a Arab socialist nationalist but his regime deterioated into a government that was there just to serve him. Generally these regimes keep their people poor. Myanmar is another example. But the most brutal regimes are the ones that follow an ideology and therefor think the atrocities that they commit are for the common good. When you are doing something for the common good you can excuse almost anything. Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot - all true believers. That is why they were so brutal and effective.


2) Stalin actually improved his country in many ways, and there was logic in most of the things he did. He definitely improved the standard of living of most Russians. He was a true believing communist and everything he did was in line with communist ideology. You have the dictatorship of the prolitariate that has to rearange the body politic until every thing is working correctly and then the state can wither away. But before the state withers away you need to suspend persoanl liberties and chop off some heads.

3) I can't think of any communist government that was popularly elected. In 1917 the Karensky government was elected in Russia. The Bolsheviks overthrew the government by force. They never held an election. Mao took over by force, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, Castro, and Ortega. Poland, Hungary, Romania Czecholosavakia - all coups.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 04:54 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Yeah, and now his wife's running. Scary.
"Ping! Pow!

Spanky 10-10-2005 04:55 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Mild con -- at least when the discussion is about Stalin, etc., Spanky doesn't resort to his classic "stories about people I hob-nob with as a substitute for analytical thought" routine.
Or another way of looking at is practical experience as opposed to pie in the sky theories that have never been tested.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 04:56 PM
The dimwits should take a lesson in bi-partisanship from this guy
 
On Sunday, October 16, a truly unique political event will take place. Teaming up with the legendary rock group U2 for a one-night only appearance will be Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Penn.).

So what does the Irish rocker have in common with the conservative senator?

As in the case of Santorum, Bono’s religious convictions inform his activities.

The U2 leader shared some of his faith perspectives with the author of the book "Bono in Conversation.” He said, "It’s a mind-blowing concept that the God who created the universe might be looking for company, a real relationship with people.”

Santorum told "Christianity Today” that "faith is a source of morality; it’s a source of virtue; it’s a source of reason. It’s a tremendous influence on my worldview"

Hank Chinaski 10-10-2005 04:58 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
On Sunday, October 16, a truly unique political event will take place.

Teaming up with the legendary rock group U2 for a one-night only appearance will be Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Penn.).

So what does the Irish rocker have in common with the conservative senator?

As in the case of Santorum, Bono’s religious convictions inform his activities.

The U2 leader shared some of his faith perspectives with the author of the book "Bono in Conversation.” He said, "It’s a mind-blowing concept that the God who created the universe might be looking for company, a real relationship with people.”

Santorum told "Christianity Today” that "faith is a source of morality; it’s a source of virtue; it’s a source of reason. It’s a tremendous influence on my worldview.”
Is there an Adult thread for dirty photoshops on Santorum' homepage message board?

Gattigap 10-10-2005 04:58 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
It was personal disparagement of Spanky's writing style, where he uses the phrase "Pay Attention", which he would not have to use if the libs would actually pay attention to what he writes. It was a form criticism bereft of substance. What part of that do you have trouble understanding?
"Substance." Good to know that this is the touchstone of your posting philosophy. I'll try to emulate your approach, and start by accumulating a warehouse of doctored images of American politicians.

Did you just call me Coltrane? 10-10-2005 04:59 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Yeah, and now his wife's running. Scary.
I am definitely not on the Hillary bandwagon. Yikes.

There has to be somebody in b/w her and whatever crazy evangelical freak Penske wants.

Gattigap 10-10-2005 05:00 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Did you do all that in one breath?

Actually, the Revolution was a completely popular one, brought about by the crushing brutality of life under the Tzars. Once the Whites were on their way out, there was to be a haggis in every pot, free land for all, and the opportunity to take whatever you wanted from anyone who had more then you. Pretty compelling for a populace that was slowly starving to death.

Point is, Stalin had loads of popular suppport. He was just good at figuring out what sections he could do without. And then, of course, acting on that knowledge.
I don't disagree with that. FWIW, my response was an attempt at humor re: Spanky's black/white historical classifications, and tendency to label anyone who doesn't wholeheartedly agree with him as a member of a simpering, pacifistic Left.

Spanky 10-10-2005 05:04 PM
The are endowed by their creator with certain inalieable rights......
 
What liberals fail to realize is that the greatest evil occurs when the individual can be sacrificed for the good of society. That is what "dictatorship of the prolietariate" is all about. If our rights come from man, then those rights can be taken away by man. So when government wants to improve on the state body politic, and can suspend individual rights to do so, that is when you can justify killing millions of people.

However, if rights are God given, and cannot be taken away for the common good, it is much harder to start exterminating people for the common good.

If there is a universal moral code that says we have rights then mass killings are hard to justify. But if all morality is relative, rights are just given by man and are relative and can be taken away for the common good (like in a communist society) that is when the killing fields get organized.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 05:04 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
"Substance." Good to know that this is the touchstone of your posting philosophy. I'll try to emulate your approach, and start by accumulating a warehouse of doctored images of American politicians.
there is far more substantive point behind the satire of some of those pictures than anything in any of y'all's "fuck yous" or "films of shit" and other PoPD. That just vacuous masturbatory waste product staining the board, much like Clinton abusively stained his intern's dress.

Penske_Account 10-10-2005 05:08 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Did you just call me Coltrane?
I am definitely not on the Hillary bandwagon. Yikes.

There has to be somebody in b/w her and whatever crazy evangelical freak Penske wants.
Interesting. Again with PoPD.

First of all, you supporting Hillary would not be that surprising. She is not that far left of the criminal you have in office as your mayor (plus she is a Chicagolander).

Second, I have already put forth my dream ticket for 2008. Do you pay attention? Do you listen to the words or the beat?

McCain/Bush (Jeb). McCain is a real evangelical freak. Indeed. Why so much hate and bias Coltrane? Still bonking from yesterday?

Spanky 10-10-2005 05:08 PM
Differing Concepts of Justice and Freedom
 
Quote:
Originally posted by bilmore
Yeah, and now his wife's running. Scary.
I will bet that Hillary is going to be our next President. Anyone willing to give me odds?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:59 PM.
Page 63 of 126 « First 13536162 63 646573113 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com