Top Leaderboard, Site wide
September 21, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Help us grow by sharing
and liking Truthdig:
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Newsletter

sign up to get updates


Truthdigger of the Week: Naomi Klein




A Chronicle of Echoes


Truthdig Bazaar more items

 
Report

Our Rogue Evita

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Nov 16, 2009

By Eugene Robinson

No force on earth can stop Sarah Palin from becoming our very own “lite” version of Eva Peron—a glamorous and tragic legend, minus the tragedy. Eventually, some clever composer will write a blockbuster musical about her life and times. Stage directions will include: “SARAH fires gun. MOOSE dies.”

It’s futile to try to ignore Palin, however noble the effort may be. She’s a phenomenon, and it hardly matters that so many people believe she augurs the final dissolution of American politics into a big, frothy bowl of mush. The republic will survive even her.

Anyway, she’s unlikely ever to become—shudder—commander in chief. A new Washington Post-ABC News poll shows that 60 percent of Americans believe Palin is not qualified to be president, and 53 percent “definitely” would not vote for her. 

You do have to wonder about the 37 percent who’d think about it, though. And as for the 9 percent who definitely would vote for Palin, that’s enough people to qualify as a movement—the equivalent of Evita’s fervid descamisados, or “shirtless ones,” who entrusted her with their hopes and dreams.

Palin’s followers can afford shirts. But evidently they feel so disenfranchised, so ignored, so put upon by forces beyond their control, that they are willing to look past her every shortcoming and forgive her every betrayal. What matters is “Going Rogue”—not the cleverly titled book itself, but Palin’s willingness to thumb her nose at political and social convention.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
So what if she displayed no real grasp of the issues in interviews during last year’s campaign? Those reporters were being beastly, trying to show her up. So what if the inside-the-Beltway crowd thinks she’s an airhead? The state of mind called “Washington” is the problem, and she’s the solution. So what if she quit as governor of Alaska with a year and a half left in her term? “Only dead fish go with the flow,” she explained, demonstrating once more her sassy roguishness.

Palin’s knack for being cleverly transgressive is almost like performance art. Her doppelganger, Tina Fey, did a hysterically prescient bit, right before Election Day, in which “Palin” vowed that she was never going away. Fey’s “Palin” predicted that she’d become either president or “a white Oprah.” So on whose show does Palin launch her book? Oprah’s, of course—adding to the long list of Palin lore that you simply couldn’t make up.

Palin indeed would be a terrific talk-show host, but she has much bigger ambitions. I think her ultimate impact, like Evita’s, may be more sociological than political.

She taps into several broad currents of discontent. She speaks for social conservatives, long taken for granted by Republicans who brandish their opposition to issues such as abortion and gay rights at election time but never actually do anything about them. She speaks for small-town and rural Americans who feel their concerns are ignored. She speaks for hunters who fear that “Washington” wants to take their guns away.

Unlike so many of her detractors—Republicans as well as Democrats—she didn’t go to an Ivy League school. She scrapped and scraped her way through college, as a lot of people do. And she’s a woman who juggles a complicated family and a demanding career. This is one of the most important elements of the Palin persona, because it resonates with so many other American women who see their own daily struggles in Palin’s.

Of course, Palin’s feminism is highly situational. She has expressed sisterly solidarity with Hillary Clinton, of all people, on the added burden that female candidates must bear in deciding what to wear on the campaign trail. But that burden was lightened for Palin by the $150,000 in designer clothing bought for her and her family with campaign funds.

True believers will not mind. Palin’s unconventional trajectory and unkempt mind are seen as authentic, in the sense that we all know people who’ve had ups and downs in their lives and who couldn’t point to Kazakhstan on a map. Her success to date represents a triumph of authenticity over accomplishment. In the final analysis, I believe, that’s not enough to make her president. But others seeking the 2012 Republican nomination underestimate her at their peril.

Toward the end of her life, Eva Peron gave a famous speech in which she vowed, “I will return, and I will be millions!” Sarah Palin, our Evita, has returned—and she will make millions. 

Eugene Robinson’s e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.

© 2009, Washington Post Writers Group


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 9, 2010 at 9:12 am Link to this comment

American Populace-Back Street America:

OzarkMichael’s foolish, prating prattle is characteristic of a dummy. 

YOU, the American Populace, Back Street America, ARE the Jews together with the Weimar Republic and all of the other victims of the Third Reich of Adolph Hitler

OzarkMichael doesn’t have a clue about anything other than his own self-serving delusions.  OzarkMichael’s understanding exists only in his own mind.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, January 9, 2010 at 7:44 am Link to this comment

The discussion about cancer/humanity/politics is fascinating. Please do not waver from the intelligent, thought provoking conversation.

These are thoughtful human beings posting here. But Martha/Thomas is not satisfied with that. She is not reflecting or pondering anything, instead there is a clumsy brutality in her veiled threats that is meant to frighten people into compliance.

I have spent a great deal of time investigating her source material(Mein Kampf), she demanded tyhat we read it and i have done so. Now I am fixated on her fixation with it. But the nice informative conversation should continue.

To this end, I ask the participants to ignore Martha/Thomas and myself as we tussle. Please do not applaud or argue with either one of us. Please dont waste your good posts on a dead end subject.

Martha/Thomas said: The Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS by way of the Republican Party and the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber have implemented “a philosophy filled with infernal intolerance”

Dont you realize, Martha/Thomas, that you have just set up the Republicans as the Weimar Republic? If we are the “infernal intolerance”, that Hitler claimed needed to be eliminated, this makes you the “champion with a mighty will” who wants to “break” us. In your own analogy you are placing yourself as a new Hitler. I knew you were going to say it too. Are you doing this on purpose or are you just stupid?

This isnt the first time you have done it. This is the 17th time you have quoted Mein Kampf and promptly shown yourself to be practicing Hitler’s approach. This is the 17th time I have called you on it. This time i even called you on it BEFORE you went and spouted it out. Scroll down and see what i wrote on January 8 at 3:48 pm.

It has gotten to the point where I know what you are going to say and I preempted you. This is boring for everyone except you and me. No one else cares! They heard your message and witnessing and now they are done with you. They dont care about our argument since they are having a very cordial and sophisticated conversation.

Martha/Thomas, the only person you really ought to fight with is me. I expose you as the most fascist person since Hitler. No doubt you think i am the chief fascist here. Well, you have said it so there is no doubt that is your view.

I am the only person here who cares what you think. I want to know how you plan to accomplish all 25 steps to fascism. But the others are bored and disgusted by the whole thing. They have moved on. So why dont you and I argue someplace else and leave these people alone?

Why dont you make one more post, a summary/goodbye post, and then you and I will keep quiet here and we can argue someplace else. You name the forum and I promise to meet you there. Bring your friends if you have any.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 9, 2010 at 12:20 am Link to this comment

I waited too long to post this and you finished your post, BR549!  And an
articulate one it was!  Thank you.  Your well-expressed analogy seems to fit the
way a government could go topsy turvy.  I will post my thoughts anyway as I
was responding to that question about humankind’s consciousness and why it
evolved when it did and not before and the part one of your explanation. 

As an aside but related:
Night-Gaunt, an interesting question to be sure and PBS has produced a
somewhat academic program asking the same question, The Human Spark, but
BR549’s answer is much more intriguing, don’t you agree?  But if interested it
can be watched over the Internet at
http://www.pbs.org/wnet/humanspark/featured/interactive-highlights-from-the-human-spark/390/

There is cursory information such as about the Neanderthals and their
subsequent disappearance when homo sapiens eclipsed them (there is much
discussion in the field as to how that happened), though not nearly enough,
but there are books of course and other research for those interested more. 
But you know that.  I’m just reminding.  It is better than most of the stuff on
the tellie.  Or we are lucky, we have BR549.

I do follow BR549 what you are driving at, I think, and I am very interested. 
What you are saying almost reminds me of Einstein when he said he got most
of his fantastic ideas about gravity and relativity as he was gardening not when
he was in the lab or office.  Seems he believed the mind opens itself to allow a
flow of ideas when the intent was not so focused.  Though your point is that it
comes in bits of creativity that builds on the last piece one piece at a time.  Do I
have that right?  Maybe yours and Einstein’s ideas are related more than I
think.  Maybe there is a subconscious self-heuristic mechanism where curiosity
makes a kind of trial and error journey until the answer is revealed?  Kind of an
adaptive problems solving system?  It seems that it might be linear but maybe
just not continuously linear.  The line is established but it is fragmented?  Like a
dashed line where each segment grows maybe not exponentially until a certain
quantity has been accumulated.  I have heard of schema learning theory
possibly some form of it where the units are very small that might explain why
it took the time it did for humans’ minds to evolve?  I’m obviously fishing, that
uses a line too!  Maybe the spiritual maturity you speak of is having too huge a
concentration on a puzzle and while the whole answer is flickering around in
the mind, the tenacity of the desire to know itself gets in the way and because
it wants to arise in consciousness there is a mental gate that allows only parts
of it to emerge at a time, but each piece can be seen to build on the former
one(s)?  It is that audacity, or ardent resolution to find the answer that is the
“spiritual” maturity.  Children are too impatient, and want answers Now!  The
spiritually mature will keep searching with some hunch the answer is there.  It
also reminds me of Michelangelo’s notion that the form is in the stone and he
needs only to release it, though his is rather a more concrete form, I offer a
smile at that last one.  Maybe I am way off beam.  You will say so.  This is
soooo much better a discussion.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 8, 2010 at 11:01 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, January 8 at 3:05 am

Part 2:
You seemed to have gotten the gist of that analogy right off the bat. I don’t
claim for it to have been perfect, but again, I’m only trying to illustrate that the
analogies are infinite and that for anyone to sit here and quibble about one side
this, the other side that, is just spinning their wheels and having no place to
displace their anger and frustration over not being able to see any meaningfull
target. That is when everyone becomes a target, as when the body develops an
autoimmune issue.

You had mentioned “cancer” before. My thoughts about that, from a
physiologic sense, are these. Our cells started out billions of years ago as single
celled organisms being thrashed around in the ocean at the current’s mercy. As
we developed organelles, mitochondria, etc., the primitive DNA that we had up
to that point had us basically taking care of our own immediate needs,
consuming our surroundings and self-replicating.

Over eons, and after a lot of evolutionary experimentation, we reached a point
of specialization where EACH cell in our body had the IDENTICAL DNA, but
depending on what functions needed to be accomplished, was coaxed by some
enzyme into expressing just one aspect of its information. Well, all this
specialization assumes that the host body has taken over all the primary
functions such as providing nutrition, eliminating wastes, taking care of
invaders, etc.

Well, what we see happening with cancer is that after the host body decides to
ignore those increasingly more busy worker cells, those worker cells start
getting undernourished, have to work in their own waste, and fall victim to all
the assaults from fungi and parasites that the body should have been more
diligent about. Eventually, those little worker cells just say fuck it and
functionally revert back to an earlier stage of programming where they COULD
get their needs met. They revert from a more civilized (or specialized) model
into a more feral state. Hey, gotta stay alive. That was the prime direction from
day one in evolution.

So, in the civilized state, cells “agree” to undergo apoptosis
(programmed cell death) for the good of the whole, while, under their more feral state, they just decide to make more of themselves and consume their surroundings. (I’m way oversimplifying things here.) Somewhere on road downward, those cells may have given up on the host ever coming to grips with this or any real emergency so, while they can, some cancers will actually secrete their own hormones to develop a capillary bush off of an artery and wind up feeding right off the host. It will now feed itself by stealing an inordinate amount of blood, rob the host of nutrients, and just keep making babies, so to speak.

You could look at this as the brain being the White House, the adrenals glands being the Pentagon, the liver and digestive tract as Health and Human Services, the veins and arteries as being our Interstate system, etc. In essence, when the Whitehouse keeps misinterpreting its incoming data and getting the WRONG idea about what its outside threat potential is and keeps telling the Pentagon to get ready for war, sooner or later that entire effort will just drag down the economy (the body economy) to the point where everyone becomes a threat (as in an autoimmune disorder) and the whole thing spirals downward out of control. Whether we are talking Whitehouse or the Bilderberg Group as the brain, it doesn’t make any difference. Given the state of evolution, man was meant to live in small communities where he is a functional part of a uniquely identifiable group of his peers, not lined up and RFIDed like cattle in a stockyard.

These elitists think they have a master plan to put this NWO into place, but I put my money on mother nature giving them a swift backhand before that ever happens.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 8, 2010 at 8:09 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, January 8 at 3:05 am

Sorry to take so long getting back to you on this one (a lot going on at work).

BTW, I loved Night Gaunt’s question about what prompted our rapid rise in
such a short time. It has to be that obelisk from Kubrick’s 2001.  :o)

There were some interesting events that may have contributed to our rise,
although I’m still trying to piece parts of that together. One event was the Toba
Event about 70-80,000 years ago in what is now Sumatra. Although it has
been proposed that this event may have wiped out nearly all life in Southeast
Asia at the time, dropping the worldwide human population to 10,000, I was at
a lecture that suggested the human population was dropped down to about
1,000. That would certainly constrain the gene pool.

PART 1:
But back to Shenonymous’ lengthy replies to me from yesterday; I’m just going
to toss some thoughts out there as you had presented them.

I guess my whole point in having developed this viewpoint over the years was
that it wasn’t even my viewpoint to develop. I was just trying to stay
OPEN. What this means for politics and the NWO, is no different than discussing
the rope or the alternator I mentioned before. Sooner or later, we come to find
that these great ideas of ours, were never really ours; we just borrowed them. It
was the evolution of our minds that opened up that gateway to solve higher
orders of obstacles in our path.

There was this one scene in The Hunt for Red October” where Alec Baldwin is
seen talking to himself while shaving in the mirror. He has a problem; a boat
load of Russian submariners and he realizes that he must first get the sailors
off the submarine. In thinking about the plans of the Russian skipper (Sean
Connery), he says, “So how’s he gonna get the crew off the sub? They have to
want to get off. How do you get a crew to want to get off a submarine? How do
you get a crew to want to get off a nuclear sub…...?

It was at that point that he never finished the word submarine. He had escalated each question to the point where he had put the answer itself into the final one; ultimately that no sailor would want to stay onboard a ship that was leaking radiation. These alpha moments; these bits of creativity are how we can often find answers for ourselves, about almost anything. The problem is that if we are not spiritually mature enough (and this has nothing to do with religion), we may never get an answer. It’s as if we are subconsciously over focused on some problem that affects us viscerally and we only get as far as the third sentence of the four I cited in Baldwin’s monologue.

Let’s say we want to ask a question about what the fate of humanity might be in 2012. Do we have a right to know? It would be like having your four year old ask for the keys to Dad’s new Corvette, just because he’d figured out how to go down the driveway in his little plastic Big Wheel. Even we, as much as we think or sometimes almost demand we have a right to know something, are still stuck on our Big Wheel. If we can’t seem to get the right answers, it’s because we’re still stuck in the driveway without “permission"to go beyond it.  (cont’d)

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 8, 2010 at 7:54 pm Link to this comment

BR549, January 8 at 4:38 pm,

The Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS by way of the Republican Party and the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber have implemented “a philosophy filled with infernal intolerance” against the Left and Liberals in the United States from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II and continue to do so at the present time; I am both a witness and a messenger that this is so.  The Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST “philosophy filled with infernal intolerance” implemented by the Republican Party and the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS against the Left and Liberals is a Hitleresque tactic out of Adolph Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” and the self-evident behavior of the Republican Party and the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber cries out to the World that the Republican Party is engaged in Hitleresque sophistry and propaganda to accuse, condemn, denounce, and demonize the Left and Liberals in preparation for a “Final Solution”

Adolph Hitler states in “Mein Kampf” that “a philosophy filled with infernal intolerance will only be broken by a new idea, driven forward by the same spirit, championed by the same mighty will, and at the same time pure and absolutely genuine in itself”.

I advocate that what goes around must come back around; a philosophy filled with infernal Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST intolerance has “gone around” from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II and continues to the present date, and “a philosophy filled with infernal intolerance will only be broken by a new idea, driven forward by the same spirit, championed by the same mighty will, and at the same time pure and absolutely genuine in itself”, as fire that fights fire to cancel out the fire of “a philosophy filled with infernal intolerance” started against the Left and Liberals by the Republican Party and fueled by the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, and continues to the present date.

YOU do not represent the best interests of the American Populace, Back Street America, as a firefighter against the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS and the Republican Party to help put out the fire; all YOU want to do is watch the fire burn, YOU are, therefore, either complicit with the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS that started and fuel the fire or YOU have other expedient reasons contrary to the best interests of the American Populace, Back Street America that gives you reason to sell the American Populace, Back Street America, down the river in service to YOUR OWN expedient needs.

I have expressed to you what my Standards of Civility are for those who are not a friend of the American Populace, Back Street America, and I do not consider YOU to be a friend of the American Populace, Back Street America; I feel that the Standards of Civility I expressed are appropriate to any further dialogue that I engage in with you, as well as OzarkMichael, Shenonymous, Night-Gaunt, and Leefeller.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 8, 2010 at 12:38 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG, January 8 at 12:58 am

Look, I’m not trying to be adversarial, but whatever stance I take doesn’t mean I have to comply with ANYONE’S criteria for trying to have a civil conversation. After seven paragraphs, I’m still scratching my head wondering where you were going with that vein.

Look, in the search for the truth, those who are truly seeking it realize that, sooner or later, they have more and more in common with everyone else seeking the truth, no matter what views they may MAY SEEM to be arguing about at the time,so that becomes the common ground.

Democrat, Republican, Portuguese or Swahili, Muslim or Christian, it doesn’t mean squat if people keep dragging their isolationist baggage into a conversation to muck up any hope of moving forward. Anyway, I do not wish to be “confined” to the cages you have provided for me. That doesn’t mean any of us can’t still be civil with anyone else here.

Report this
OzarkMichael's avatar

By OzarkMichael, January 8, 2010 at 11:48 am Link to this comment

In another forum “BR549, Shenonymous, Night Gaunt”, and myself were asked by Martha/Thomas G: Do you agree or disagree that a philosophy filled with infernal intolerance will only be broken by a new idea, driven forward by the same spirit, championed by the same mighty will..

and then asks:

Do “you people” accept or reject this philosophy, if not, why not?

Absolutely not, since the “champion with a mighty will” is basically the definition that Hitler used for himself. That just so happens to be from Mein Kampf. Step #17 to fascism.

Another Nazi proposal by Martha/Thomas which deserves to be exposed and rejected, and so i answered her foolish question on this forum.

As for the rest of you, please carry on. Its an engaging conversation, so dont let Martha/Thomas or me distract you from it.

I dont mind taking out the trash.

Leave Martha/Thomas to me.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, January 8, 2010 at 8:17 am Link to this comment

Glad to see I am able to sign in and finally come here instead of the TD main page.

BR549, She and Night Guant most interesting hypothesis or premise, so damn refreshing compared to the normal political tripe which usually ends were the sun don’t shine. 

Thinking out of the box, seeing beyond the blinders, promoting something not as absolutists is so appreciated. One shouldn’t try to fool Mother Nature!
Seems, humility should be an important spoke in the grand Scheme of things. 

BR549 posts an interesting premise!

So one could question the Fancy Fable known as The Tower of Babel? A rival? 

Maybe it has always been this way, as the entrenched power structures disallowed free thought and slowed development to a snails for the longest time? Let’s face it the strongest person welding the biggest club was always in charge, so one could suggest, Einstein would not have gone very far as a Caveman or would he?

Please, keep discussion on the real cave man not the knuckle Dragging kind in Washington, this seems most enlightening.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, January 7, 2010 at 11:06 pm Link to this comment

Yes one of the puzzles for anthropologists is why humanity sat on their thumbs for 200,000 years with the same kind of brain but didn’t do much of anything until some 10,000-6,000 years ago. What was the catalyst that started it all? I could posit that humanity could have easily created and advanced civilization 80,000 years ago and lost it. It could certainly better explain the OOPARTs found all over the world, except at the Poles. [Out Of Place ARTifacts; too advanced for the strata they are found in.] Most of which would be gone in such a long span of (human) time and would be removed from the earth. Leaving only stories carried over orally. I am speculating here but what prompted our rapid rise in so short a time? There is evidence of ancient uranium mining. How much of our society would exist 72,000 years later?

Anyway the use of the body as analogy of course reminds me of the “Body of Christ” used by believers. Humans can make collective mistakes being separate from Nature and can ignore it. We see its evidence even now with so many problems created by humans alone. I am intrigued by the questions.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 7, 2010 at 11:05 pm Link to this comment

Seeing that certain primordial systems are repeated in a modern idiom is the
stuff that scientists love with the greatest passion.  It becomes a joyous
discovery when it is seen that there are isomorphic pairings because it simply
is the most efficient way to solve particular problems.  The parallel members
may not on the surface look alike, it is the underlying mechanism that is
identical.  When seen and understood, it is a stunning event.

I can see how much you take pleasure in learning these kinds of things.  And
you have the gift of explaining them eloquently.

I was merely trying to understand that marvelous body analogy in your earlier
post so don’t worry too much.  It was appreciated with all due respect. 
Application of it to politics was fascinating.  I like to see if analogies fit.  You
seem to have come to an existential moment.  It is one I frequently sense when
considering how vast is the universe and how small humans are that exist
relative to it.  The trove of knowledge is staggering and there was a time when I
wanted to have all of it.  But then, realizing my naivete, I came to understand
there is only so much that can be learned in the space of time one has to live. 
That brought me to my senses and so now I learn what I can and know there
will be many millennia worth that I will never know. If I can make any
connections I will be satisfied.  I say don’t be too hard on humans as they are
young in comparison with the age of the universe.  Everything takes time.  I
also say the Earth will take care of itself and it is only one tiny and really an
insignificant element in the context of the universe.  I know humans are
arrogant to think they are special.  If humans are instrumental in their own
demise, I dare say the Earth will not care one iota, and the Universe even less. 
Darwin’s universe has seen millions of species come and go.  Humans can only
delay the inevitable when the entire galaxy collapses in on itself, if indeed that
black hole exists at its center.  Reason enough to make the conscious life they
live as happy and wonderful as they can. 

Now those are uplifting thoughts aren’t they?  These thoughts of mine are not
to mean I don’t believe in making life more bearable for all concerned.  And I
am quite aware of the exploitation that humans force on other humans.  And
that we must do what we can within the scope of our resources whether that is
expenditure of personal energy or materially.  But I learned a long time ago
that there are many roads to Rome.  Which one is the right one is the puzzle. 
Ciao

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 7, 2010 at 10:06 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, January 7 at 10:17 pm

You really have a lot of thoughts compiled here that I want to give more
attention to tomorrow, but because of your detailed questioning, I confess, I’m
going to have to print this out and go over it first ...... if you don’t mind.

But so that you might better sleep tonight, my main thinking behind all this
probably started when I was wondering one day how the hell neolithic man
ever developed the concept of three stranded rope. Sounds crazy, I know, most
people go home after work and turn on American Idol; I get into stupid stuff
like this.

Well, as it turns out, you could imagine this cave man (actually, I think it was a
woman) trying to think of what to do to get something stronger than a vine that
was also far more flexible (so as to be able to roll up in a coil). Time goes by, a
little daydreaming in alpha starts experimentation in TWO strands, then to
three, and when the final product emerges, what we have is a near perfevt
replica of a collagen strand. So here, all along, mother nature had given the
body the solution ,but it took us umteen million years to live into and discover
the answer.

Second, I was always curious about who, exactly, designed the electrical generator,
which then evolved into the alternator. These similar designs both employ
segmented armatures to alternate polarity as those segments pass by certain
charged stationary “poles”. Here, nature wins again. As it turns out, the
rotational behavior or certain types of cellular flagella actually spin, and the
head of the flagella rotates around inside a series of poles of alternating
polarity.

My point here is that for all the effort we put into thinking that we humans are “the ultimate creation” (well, some do anyway), we really need to humble our asses back to reality and realize that these analogs go far further into our future evolution than we can even possible imagine, and rather than trying to
constantly trying take control of events or people, what we should be doing is embracing the “mystery”, every day. We are so far off course.

I’ll address YOUR earlier posts, when I get to work, if that’s OK.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 7, 2010 at 8:58 pm Link to this comment

BR549, January 6 at 11:29 pm,

Are you a functioning part of the “body politic” of the American Populace, Back Street America, and if so, do you align yourself with the “body politic” of the American Populace to serve the Greater Good of the “body politic” of the American Populace?

I can understand, as I said before, that you cannot align yourself with the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, because I do not align myself with either party, although I am a “card carrying member” of the Democratic Party.

As a “card carrying member” of the Democratic Party, I support the “body politic” of the American Populace, Back Street America, and I only align myself with the Democratic Party to the extent that the Democratic Party functions as a part of the “body politic” of the American Populace, Back Street America.

Before we deal with the “body politic” of the World, it is important to first deal with the “body politic” of the American Populace, Back Street America.  If you are aligned with the “body politic” of the American Populace as a functioning part of the American Populace, Back Street America, we have Common Ground for understanding and friendship.  If you are not aligned with the “body politic” of the American Populace, as a functioning part of the American Populace, Back Street America, we do not have Common Ground for understanding and friendship.

Do you or do you not align yourself with the “body politic” of the American Populace, Back Street America, as a functioning part of the body politic of the American Populace? ————  If you do, I can call you friend———if you do not, I can not call you friend.

My Standards For Civility for those who are not my friends and are not a part of the American Populace, Back Street America are as follows:

Confront those who practice the behavior of fulminating and equivocating truculent contention with the behavior of fulminating and equivocating truculent contention, so that those who are trying to cause an effect by the use of fulminating and equivocating truculent contention learn at the “outset” that the only cause they are effecting by their practice of fulminating and equivocating truculent contention is their suffering the effect of fulminating and equivocating truculent contention as a result of their efforts——what goes around—comes around.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 7, 2010 at 6:17 pm Link to this comment

Thank you for the smile.  Not too many on these forums smile.  Though I often
laugh!

Because of the long and complex nature of your last comment, my attempt to
understand it will take two entries of comments. So, hoping I don’t drown…

1.  These are the parallels you have set up.
body = world
organ = countries
cells = people
DNA = nature
energy of emotion = beliefs that lead to action

To see if I understand I will map out your somewhat dazzling body paradigm as
an analogy for the world political functional structure:  The world (body) is
composed of countries (organs) that have individual identities (different organs,
i.e., stomach, liver, kidney, heart, etc.,) but have similar subsystems. i.e.,
people (cells), as do other countries that have different purposes.  Reading your
homology, possibly with respect to each other they have different purposes, but
with respect to the whole world, do countries have different purposes?  E.g.,
The USA to the world, or the USA to Turkey?  Germany to the world, or
Germany to France?  Internally each country (organ) has different beliefs
(energy of emotions) and the people (cells) of that country have a common
purpose. 

You theorize that countries, like organs, developed uniquely as a result of
some stressor, possibly by a collective consciousness specific to their group’s
needs.  The need could be a function of global location, i.e, harsh terrain,
severe weather patterns, food availability, etc.

The world, like the body, operates by one system of governance, nature (as
does the DNA programming).  Is that right?  All the people (cells) of the world
(body) are similar in physiology hence are commonly ruled by that system of
governance.  But the people of a particular country (specific gene expression)
don’t determine the unique energy of an organ’s function which is the same as
every other country’s (also each like an organ). 

All the people (cells) of a country (organ) must receive the same (common)
message in order to do a specific job, particularly in the right place (correct
location).  If that did not happen, the people could wind up in the wrong place. 
Such as when they become confused and mislocate, possibly becoming
terrorist in character (like cancer cells).  I am not sure how a people can
“mislocate.”

Even though I have some questions, this seems to be a very good somatic
analogy. Your professional knowledge of anatomy and physiology seems well-
used to show your points about “the current situation” and a morphology said
in terms almost anyone can understand.  It is very apparent how the
interactions of the body systems and parts function as a whole can be used in
a parallel construction for how world populations might also function in a
healthy, or an unfavorable way, depending on the way certain forces shift or
change in relation to one another.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 7, 2010 at 6:16 pm Link to this comment

2.  If I have understood so far, two more questions will help me to understand
your simile better: what do you mean by “our creator” and when you use the
word spirit or spiritual?  I am not acting dumb or trying to be obnoxious but
my beliefs hover on the humanistic side, secular, not religious.  Everyone uses
those words in personal ways yet they have many differing meanings and
connotations.  Also I am not trying to change the course of your discussion
about the nature of the political interaction of world’s population to a
discussion of the metaphysical.  I am interested in authentic discussion to see
where positive action will lead to a better world, starting with our own country. 
I am aware that spirit may mean a supernatural being or essence but when the
word is used in such a detailed physical analogy, the sentiments get hazy. 
Using the word creator usually means a creator deity that is responsible for the
creation of the world.  It is important to understand what you mean by these
words because of the implications that would be associated with your body
analogy.

You say you don’t think the various cultures were developed by accident or
chance, but you do not say how you think they did develop.  Seems like you
might be saying something spiritual makes that happen?  I admit to being
somewhat confused here.  But the effect is that when stress occurs (disease)
cells kill other cells (people kill other people).  However, the real enemy is each
cell’s (person’s) reaction to the emotion of fear.  That fear chokes a connection
to a deity.  Have I missed your meaning here?

________________________
Afterthought…
Not sure how this all relates to the NWO business as that seems to have been
inserted as the reason for the world’s problems, when it seems beyond
anything an alleged NWO could be doing.  Not knowing exactly what the NWO
is, or what it might be up to, it would certainly be their failure not to notice the
differences among peoples (cells) of the countries (organs) of the world (body). 
Seems like you are saying that conflict happens when countries resist patterns
and traditions they have not yet evolved to have.  And that such forcing causes
the world (body) to fail to thrive.  I am not sure what the head is supposed to
represent as being brought down with the body.  The two causes, NWO
coercion, and national resistance to exotic influence (meaning outside
influence), do not seems to be related. 
______________________
If as you imply all current political organizations are dysfunctional, I cannot see
what you propose as a remedy.  What is your prescription for either preventing
or curing the auto-immune disorder (self destruction from fear) to govern a
country as large and diverse as the United States?  How would that apply and
affect the world as well?

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 7, 2010 at 4:35 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, January 7 at 5:11 am

By all means, dive in.  :o)

Frank

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 7, 2010 at 1:11 am Link to this comment

BR549 are you looking only for a response from TG or can anyone exchange views
or raise questions?

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 6, 2010 at 7:29 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG, January 6 at 1:34 pm

I’m glad you brought that up the way you did. I love using the body as a source of analogies. Bear with me on this one.

Relative to your questions about the organ relationships to the body as a whole (if I understood you correctly), each one of our organs serves a purpose, each organ having an identity of its own, from a TCM standpoint anyway. Each one carries the energy of an emotion, and is also related to various muscles, teeth, vertebrae, etc.

Organs in the body can be equated to the various countries around the world, but I’ll get to that later. As for the cells, each group has their own unique identity, which had most likely developed as a response to some continual stressor over time.

But just because all the cells in the body utilize the same common system of governance (i.e same DNA), that doesn’t mean that under an organ’s specific gene expression, it will perform best by doing the same function every other organ does. From that TCM perspective, an organ needs to channel its
unique energy in order to function correctly. Indeed, the identity of all those cells within a tissue group need to have a common purpose, so to speak, and, specifically following a common message that will enzymatically translate into having those cells do a specific job ..... and in the correct location. Otherwise, we could have intestine cells trying to establish themselves on the end of our nose, etc.

Endometriosis might be considered a confused cell, a mislocated cell, maybe even a terrorist cell, in that uterine cells have somehow migrated to areas of the body where they serve no purpose within their new environment and just cause a lot of trouble. They don’t speak or respond to the same enzymatic language as the surrounding cells because, quite frankly, they’re in the wrong place, still trying to do their old job.

How does this relate to countries? Well, It is MY belief that all this New World Order crap will NEVER succeed because these dysfunctional misanthropes that are behind it, Bush, Rockeller, etc, fail to recognize the absolute necessity for different peoples around the world to be able to freely express their uniquely different energies.

Each country (ethnicity might be a more accurate term) channels a specific realm of frequencies of the human collective and to deny that expression would only invite disaster on body of the the collective. The resistance of countrie being forced to adopt patterns and traditions that we have just not had enough time to evolve into, might eventually lead to an underfunctioning culture or cultures. How that would ultimately lead to an effect on the collective is a good guess. Disease, depression, massive die-offs, but sooner or later ....... the body’s failure to thrive always brings the head down with it.

I don’t think that we developed all our various cultures by accident or by chance. Where one culture goes under, somewhere, energetically,  that slack has to be picked up somewhere, and if that isn’t allowed to happen, just as in the body, it shows itself as a stress where everyone knows something is wrong, but no one individual has the higher evolution enough to identify a problem of that magnitude. No one can put their physical finger on a spiritual problem.

In the end, as we look back on our “condition”, or our disease state, what we see is an organism plagued with an auto-immune disorder, too willing to run out and kill other cells (people) with our same DNA. When we fail to see that our real enemy is falling victim to our own fears, thereby constricting our connection to
our creator, we see everyone around us as a cause of the problem, as an enemy.

Anyway, I’m rambling here, but that’s the gist of my interpretation of our current situation.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 6, 2010 at 4:52 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, January 6 at 2:59 pm,

Night-Gaunt said:  “Humanism as run by people with empathy. Those without have perverted it to reciprocity of profit over human life. That must end. The rule of the psychopaths must end if we are to have a chance to build a better world for ourselves. Otherwise it is as we see it now only it will become even more intrusive and dangerous to us all. Even to the psychopaths.”

ThomasG’s answer:  You have finally said something I agree with, if you do not equivocate and appease your way out of it.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, January 6, 2010 at 10:59 am Link to this comment

Humanism as run by people with empathy. Those without have perverted it to reciprocity of profit over human life. That must end. The rule of the psychopaths must end if we are to have a chance to build a better world for ourselves. Otherwise it is as we see it now only it will become even more intrusive and dangerous to us all. Even to the psychopaths.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 6, 2010 at 9:46 am Link to this comment

Does humanism as an ideology stand apart from all other ideologies and eclipse them all??? ———- Or, could it be possible that humanism could be a constituent part of other ideologies???

Do all ideologies have to be in conflict, or could common ground be found in all differing ideologies as well as humanism???

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 6, 2010 at 9:34 am Link to this comment

BR549, January 5 at 8:06 pm,

How would what you say apply to YOU, if YOUR heart did not align itself with YOUR body, or YOUR liver, or YOUR kidneys sought to be independent, as you say? 

Do you suppose that the Greater Good of YOUR body may be achieved by YOUR heart, kidneys and liver aligning themselves apart from YOUR body and that to live on the body politic without being aligned with the body politic’s Overall Good and Overall Maintenance is relatively the same relationship that mistletoe has with a tree, as a parasite on the body of the tree?

I do not say this to insult or demean what you have said; I say this in the hope of generating deeper thought than the reflection on the surface of water.

I can understand why you don’t want to align yourself with the Republican Party or the Democratic Party, but not to align yourself with the Greater Good, rather than the Greater Greed is self-serving independence at someone else’s expense.

The American Populace is who I align myself with and the Greater Good of the American Populace ———— I cannot align myself with you, as a friend, if you do not align yourself with the Greater Good of the American Populace, rather than the Greater Greed of individual self-serving self-interest at the expense of the American Populace.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 6, 2010 at 1:03 am Link to this comment

If there is common agreement that humanism is needed to solve the problems
of the world, what exactly is preventing it?  American society could take a
lesson from Sweden.  The challenge would be to teach Americans their
principles of life.  The Swedes are an interesting society of humanists.  Defined,
humanism is a view of life that does not rely on supernatural phenomenon in
life or after death.  They say they believe in life before death.  I say yea to that.

Less than 10% of the Swedes have a christian belief and over 60% are
humanists according to several scientific surveys.  Six times are humanists than
are christian.  They believe humans create either a better or worse world as
they live.  While they defend religious freedom they worry about the
pervasiveness of religious fundamentalism, or fanatical religion in every detail. 
This is true for Christian fundamentalism, which has had its cruel history, as
well as Moslem fundamentalism, especially its imposition of death penalties
against their critics and efforts to dominate the world.  Jewish fundamentalists
are obstructionists in attaining peace in the middle east.  Humanism is the
opposite of fundamentalism.  It appeals to people to think analytically and
actively seek truth wherever it leads.  Then making their own decisions from
being as informed as they can.  They do unto others as they would have done
unto themselves is their belief which is called the Golden Rule as conceived by
Confucius and Buddha long before showing up in the west in Egyptian and
Greek philosophy.  It is the ethic of reciprocity, the conceptual essence of
human rights.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, January 5, 2010 at 10:58 pm Link to this comment

Sorry I meant Wollin, my bad.

BR549 I agree with you sentiments on the last paragraph. We need humanism in what we do. Without it we get expediency in relation to human, and the earth, to get their profit. That must end before we end.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, January 5, 2010 at 9:24 pm Link to this comment

Why are you doing this?

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 5, 2010 at 4:06 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG,
Whoa, time out. I never claimed to be a part of the Political Left, nor the Right,
and for that matter, the center. Why does it always have to come down to
aligning oneself with some ideology in order for the rest of some group to feel
warm and fuzzy?

I align myself with our Constitution and the Ten Commandments, and I don’t
practice any religion now except to make it a point to come, as Ram Dass
would say, “back to the Center, back to the Center”; and he wasn’t referring to
politics, either. I could argue, as have many other about their polar opposites,
that Democrats have no fiscal responsibility and the Republicans always think
the sky is falling, when in actuality, under today’s political climate, one could
take the best attributes of both parties, combine to form an alternate party, and
that party would probably lose because it seemed to good to be true.

When I had sold cars years ago, it was amazing to watch how many customers would come back to the same abusive sleazy salemen that porked him and his family members every time one of them would walk in the door. We all got to eventually review each other’s deals, but guys like that would sock it to some struggling young or elderly couple and still be able to sleep at night. They’d go home and count sheeple.

Well, so as not to digress further, that same mentality shows up in politics and
the majority of people are just not spiritually mature enough to link their
subconscious with their emotionally driven voting habits; particularly when
they leave no room for compromise.

Anyway, if you are happening see me as wavering or non-committal, nothing could be further from the truth. Blind allegiance to any one party only represents having already chosen between a bullet or an arrow.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 5, 2010 at 7:01 am Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, January 5 at 4:26 am,

I refer you, Night-Gaunt, to my 10:21am post to BR549.

Have faith in and support the American Populace, and reform by the American Populace of the “close[d] corrupt election system”, rather than the “close[d] corrupt election system”, as you say, and help to institutionalize a Multi-Party Political System and Coalition Governance in the United States as a replacement for what you call a “close[d] corrupt election system”.

Be a part of the solution; be a part of helping to institutionalize a Multi-Party Political System and Coalition Governance in the United States, rather than a part of the problem by accepting and supporting governance of, for, and by constituents of what you call a “close[d] corrupt election system”.

You made mention of “Mollin” in your post.  Did you mean “Mollin” or Sheldon S. Wolin?

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 5, 2010 at 6:21 am Link to this comment

BR549, January 5 at 12:56 am,

BR549 said: “They quickly learned to abandon the belief that either one of our two corrupt
major parties is going to somehow magicly solve our country’s problems.”

ThomasG’s answer:  The American Populace will solve our country’s problems if they get solved.  The two corrupt major parties, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party, are a part of the problem, rather than a part of the solution.

The American Populace that is the Political Left can and should take over the Democratic Party by use of the Primary Election Process and use the Democratic Party for access to make and enforce law and order to empower and institutionalize a Multi-Party Political System in the United States that will give ALL Political Factions representation in Coalition Governance of the United States; this ideal is an inclusive ideal that is worthy of the time and effort that it will take to institutionalize.

If you have disagreement with these ideals of Institutionalized Multi-Party Politics and Coalition Governance in the United States, please state what your disagreement is, if you are still claiming to be my friend, and a Friend of the Political Left.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, January 5, 2010 at 12:26 am Link to this comment

As long as we have a close corrupt election system greased by corporate money and sealed from any real new and good ideas that will help us, we shall continue our death spiral for the Republic. The few in both parties that aren’t part of that corrupt system but try to work with in it are stymied by its enforce limitations and the fact they are now outsiders within it. The contagion is fascist in nature and fanatical in purpose. They want a corporate theocracy here in place of a democratic republic. That is what needs to be flushed. The problem is that they are in there very deeply and have been infiltrating both parties for many years. What they can’t yet take over they paralyzed and pervert. What Mollin has identified as an “inverted totalitarianism” kind of state. We see it in how it works, or should I say doesn’t work for us but for them. The ultimate outcome I see is that they plan on crashing the country then swooping in to take over and “save” with one of two choices. One a disaster of total chaos and cannibalism or their version of the USA as a rigid authoritarian corporate theocratic nation-state. All that is needed is when the other shoe drops on our fragile economy. When that happens, if we can’t stop it, then all will be lost. Think occupied Iraq.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 4, 2010 at 8:56 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG, January 4 at 10:32 pm

Well, you can stay up in the wheelhouse if you want to, steadfastly in
command, but I just thought I’d drop you a note to tell you that EVERYONE ELSE
HAS ABANDONED SHIP!

They quickly learned to abandon the belief that either one of our two corrupt
major parties is going to somehow magicly solve our country’s problems.

BTW, the command center you added to top of the canoe looks a bit top heavy.

(Glug, glug)

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 4, 2010 at 6:32 pm Link to this comment

BR549, January 4 at 9:09 pm,

The Ship of State turns slowly, and awareness happens slowly, but when awareness reaches the tipping point it results in revolution and the prospect of change.

I am for awareness in the American Populace that will turn the Ship of State to the course I indicated and, from my perspective, bringing the masses to a level of awareness that will force that change is worth my effort and the effort of all within the American Populace that are capable of making a contribution to that end.

The so called Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Revolution took from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I and Bush II, a period of at or about fifty years.

Revolution to empower the American Populace as the Political Left will most probably proceed at a similar rate and build strength as it goes.  I subscribe to the same outlook that China expressed to the U.S. with regard to politics, when China told the U.S. that they were forced into compliance when they were weak, but that China is no longer weak and China will act as it pleases.  At present the Political Left of the American Populace is weak and can be forced into compliance; but, as a movement, the power and strength of the Political Left of the American Populace will grow and become strong and the Political Left of the American Populace will do as it pleases; and, like China and the China Trade, will not forget about offenses committed against the Political Left of the American Populace when it was weak.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 4, 2010 at 5:13 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, January 4 at 5:07 pm,

blah.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 4, 2010 at 5:09 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG,
The odd thing about your comment on the “duopoly” is that it isn’t a duopoly at all and most voters wind up with the Morton’s Fork of no choice at all, especially when they factor into the equation that both parties are being corrupted by the same outside influences. So while one party is lying that it will do this, and the other party is lying that they will do that, when the votes get counted, the public gets screwed every time and both parties are congratulating themselves on a job well done. What they are really celebrating is that no one’s personal history turned into a scandalous resignation during the charade of legislation.

The Multiple Party and Coalition Governance aspects that you ascribe to, I have no problem with. I’m still operating under the totally naive view that ANY form of government will work as long as people have compassion and integrity. But after I wake up from that dreamstate, I have to deal that whole human nature thing, which is what tears apart every form of government.

So, with you longingly embracing this socialized capitalism and capital equity platform, how would handle it if 200 million other Americans decided to address only half of your strategy? Does that make them dolts, merely because they didn’t adopt your thinking or mine? That might be the case with many,
considering the downslide of our educational system over the years, but we have to start somewhere. And if other people perceive you as some Central Park soap box ranter standing out in the rain, wouldn’t you think that at some point it’d be worth turning on the weather channel?

The big problem we have at the moment, here in this country, is that, at every juncture, some lobbying or other outside interest keeps thwarting our attempts at meaningful legislative change. I was rehashing that thing last night about Hilary’s perjury and influence over her campaign contributions. Three branches of government she managed to manipulate in order to sleaze her way out of wearing a striped suit; now, it’s like it never happened. THAT is the kind of integrity issues I refer to.

You could put your socialized capitalism and capital equity tenets out there for
the public to embrace, but until you get politicians reminded of the fact they
are supposed to act like homo sapiens and not monkeys fighting over bananas
at the zoo, you’ll be spinning your wheels all over again, standing on that rain-
soaked peach crate once more, yelling at the raindrops.

I don’t know if you have any kids, but if you want to get riled over something, try wrestling with the issue that those pedophiles in Homeland Security will be able to see EVERY detail of your and your childrens’ exterior anatomy while going through these full body scanners, and I mean EVERY DETAIL. The government couldn’t run a functional popsicle stand and yet it continues to use a continuing array of false flag events to whittle away at our civil rights. You want something to really rant about, go after that one. Use all that energy you have to address the real issues and, along the way, you might also get others to perhaps better see your point of view.

My two cents.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, January 4, 2010 at 1:07 pm Link to this comment

Suffice it to say ThomasG that your own prating is machine-like and hard as the billyclub you could be wielding in the streets to get your point across as well in the physical world. And of the same caliber. You just use the verbal equivelent of brickbats to do it. In both cases it isn’t effective. And at least with words the average person suffers no physical damage. Just a brown shirt kind of attitude you have that is one of the many points given as to evaluating your modes of expression and what it is you are talking about. You still don’t get it. You give no details, just the rout learned speil you vomit all of the time. A bad way of getting your point across. But like Shenonymous (and whom ever else) I grow tired of your simpleton bully-boy attitude. Your “my way or the cemetery” ways are of the enemy you purport to be against. Absolutism is the enemy of freedom. Too bad you look and act like them in almost every way. It solves nothing nor does it add to the conversation. How about detail to it? Is that so hard? You’re as tight lipped as a clam on detail. No matter how it is asked you refuse to take the bait and give us some more of how you think beyond the sloganeering which is for the street not here.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 4, 2010 at 9:52 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, January 4 at 10:07 am,

As usual, YOU project YOUR OWN self-serving limitations off on me with YOUR prating, shallow, savant understanding to mischaracterize what I say in pursuit of YOUR OWN expedient agenda.

YOU should do whatever it is that YOU do and be satisfied with letting others do the same.  I have NOT appointed YOU to speak for me or to characterize what I say, and YOUR UNWANTED meddling, rather than being satisfied by just making YOUR OWN CONTRIBUTION is NOT appreciated; all that I or anyone else desire with regard to the contributions of YOU and YOUR chorus is that YOU speak for YOURSELVES, make YOUR OWN contributions, do NOT speak for others, do NOT accuse, condemn, denounce, and demonize YOUR political opponents without justification, and do NOT mischaracterize what others say; if that is too much for the sophist outrage, rage, indignation, and ridicule of YOUR chosen frame of propaganda to endure; then “be gone”, if it is YOUR desire to do so.  This type of behavior is characteristic of the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber and the American Populace have had enough of this type of fulminating, equivocating and prating behavior.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 4, 2010 at 9:21 am Link to this comment

BR549, January 4 at 9:50 am,

So that there is NO misunderstanding by the Greater Audience,  I represent a Multi-Party Political System and Coalition Governance in the United States that is representative of all political factions in the making and enforcing of legislated law and order, rather than the Winner Take All Political Duopoly of the Republican Party and the Democratic Party.  I, also, represent Socialized Capitalism that will spread capital equity throughout the Pyramid of the U.S. Economy, from the top of the pyramid to the bottom of the pyramid and include all points in between, rather than Privatized Capitalism that concentrates capital and economic benefit at the top of the pyramid for the few at the expense of the many.

Good luck to you my friend.  Perhaps you will change your mind and support my above mentioned agenda in support of the American Populace, rather than interests contrary to the American Populace; to the extent that you support my above mentioned agenda in the best interest of the American Populace, you have my support.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 4, 2010 at 6:07 am Link to this comment

This is a constitutional nation, ThomasG. You know that and you know what
that means. Government has to work through the process specified.  And this
country is structured so that revolution has to be through glacially slow
education, through referendum and legislation not anything dramatic as an
armed revolution in the way Marx and Engels envisioned.  So far the examples
of their itinerary has failed.  What you propose is first of all foggy.  You frame
your design for change in abstruse terms.  Hardly any phrase is intelligible
because of your bombastic approach.  Yes, of course the vitality of socialism
has a place in the provision of this country.  And it already does in the social
programs in place.

Second of all, you are alienating because you do not give your recipe for repair. 
But you are calling for some action without sticking out your own neck and
saying exactly what the picture of the future ought to look like.  You simply
give headlines or chapter titles but no content to your petition.  You assume
others, such as ourselves, will fill in the blanks then do your bidding, but you
are oblivious that we each have our own project.  You fail to notice we are not
your slaves even if you think we are slaves to the current system and therefore
have a slave mentality.

Your swagger will say our programs are unimportant compared to yours.  Well
we then argue as much as is reasonable, and have done so beyond
reasonableness, then walk away, for that is the reasonable thing to do.  At least
I am.  You are left with a course of no action.  Your passion is noted and we
have given your entreatment fair attention when not defending against your
personal attacks and name-calling which is ridiculous of a grown man.  But
there is something missing in your procedure that shows you have no clue into
the psychology of others that has set you into a delusion that you can effect
any change. 

We all agree change needs to take place.  But you do not even grant that
insight!  Not only we do, but a whole host of those who have the power to
actually make changes.  But your syllabus has arcane screeching in it.  Frankly I
am out of steam to try to work with you.  My skin has been thick to withstand
all the name calling you have leveled at me, but the time has come to put you
and your ideas away and get on to a program where I can be effective towards
a bette nation and better world.

I will say the same of the War of Language forum.  I just don’t want to read your
accusations, aphorisms, declarations, and dictums any longer.  You have no
skill to put your program on a path of actuality.  You merely pronounce.  You
can consider yourself a failure here because if you cannot convince educated
people, educated formally or self-educated, you cannot hope even minimally to
reach the barely educated public.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 4, 2010 at 5:50 am Link to this comment

ThomasG,

Whatever floats your boat, my friend. The facts that party ideologies have flip-flopped more than once over a couple hundred years doesn’t seem to phase you, or that, as Dr. Paul Craig Roberts, former Under Secretary of the Treasury, and Catherine Austin-Fitts, former Asst Secretary of H.U.D. have both noted, there is no difference in the parties any more, I guess doesn’t seem to phase you. And they are by no means the only ones to express that view.

What has really changed our system is that the level of outside influence has taken its toll in wearing down the integrity of Congress; all three branches, really, and that no matter WHICH party gets into office or has control, that is where the outside pressure gets applied .......

It is not my wish to challenge your belief system (well, maybe a wee bit) but since your voyage seems more bent on just getting the hell out of port in a hurry than actually setting a course for anywhere, forget the next bend in the river, I’ll take my chances with the rapids. While you seem overfocused on frantically paddling, you might want to look at the huge boulder coming at you ....... off your LEFT shoulder.

(SPLASH)

(I tried)

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 4, 2010 at 4:05 am Link to this comment

BR549, January 4 at 12:49 am,

The job of those who serve as a part of the Left-Wing Echo-Chamber to provide balance to the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber needs to be done, and I alone cannot counter-balance the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Corporate Media Echo-Chamber.

Make your own contribution and I will make mine.  I will help you as best I can, but do not expect that I will accept words alone without tending to the Ships of the Left, when the Ships of the Left, the American Populace, are under attack by the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber Fleet, taking on water, and reliant upon those who serve as the Fleet of the Left-Wing Echo Chamber to counter-balance the aggression of the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber Fleet that has been attacking the Ships of the Left from the time of Goldwater to the present.

Negotiate the end of hostilities if you can, but know that I expect such efforts to be taken as weakness by the Republican Party and the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Base of the Republican Party.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 3, 2010 at 8:49 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG,
Personally, I believe you are over focusing on the Republicans as being the problem and I don’t agree with that. That does not mean, by any stretch, that I am defending their despicable behavior, but you’ve come up with some really good material in some prior posts and it just seems like you’re spinning your
wheels and going nowhere here. The sheer futility of that, alone, must be very difficult to deal with. (just my two cents)

I pick no sides except for that of the American people and the Constitution that our “elected” officials swore an oath to protect. A candidate could be a black, Jewish lesbian and have a history of drug abuse or worse, .... but if the course for her life included being totally honest and truthful, I don’t see a problem with her taking office. I mean, how much could someone blackmail
her for? As long as she knew enough to keep AIPAC out of the Whitehouse, hey, I’d have no problem.

That Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber you spoke of is just the dysfunctional twin brother of the ilk of the Kennedy family (except JFK and Robert), Strom Thurmond, Byrd, Metzenbaum, the Clintons, Obama, and a whole host of other corrupt Democrats, too many to list. So why are you beating this to death? Yes, that echo chamber is still in place off our right ear, but we still have the chamber on the left ear blasting its lies. Somewhere along the line, we gotta stop and take stock of what the larger problem is.

As it stands now, when the feds come marching down the street
and see you ranting, they’re just going to use you as target practice or haul your butt off to a detention center while you’re blaming it all on the Right Wing Conservatives during a democratically ruled congress and presidency. We need every available man at the front line, whether figuratively, as in discussions, or literally, which point I hope never arrives.

Past that my friend, we have to paddle together or I need to get off at the next
bend in the river.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 3, 2010 at 7:59 pm Link to this comment

BR549, January 3 at 10:54 pm,

The battle here is for the greater audience BR549 and what course that Greater Audience follows.

The Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber has been engaged in leading the Greater Audience from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I, Bush II to the present and we all know what the results of that was.

The Left and Liberals do not have a Left-Wing Media Echo-Chamber to lead the Greater Audience, so it is up to me and people like me to counteract the effects of the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Media Echo-Chamber.

I respect your perspective and will do what I can, but your perspective is only one part of a greater perspective, and if that Greater Perspective is left unchecked and appeased could result in the same scenario happening in the United States that happened in Nazi Germany.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 3, 2010 at 6:54 pm Link to this comment

Yo, Thomas, we need to paddle TOGETHER, here, lest we flip the canoe over.

What I stated yesterday, I will say again, for everyone; take it or leave it. When
we start arguing about anything, anything at all, it says more about the energy
of frustration that we carry into the argument before it ever gets started, than
the points of the discussion itself.

The question we need to ask is, “Am I interested in finding a solution to the negative energy I’m holding on this issue ..... or am I just looking to dump it on someone’s convenient doorstep?”

Man, if we can’t agree to even talk about things, how are we going to agree in which direction we need to direct an organized return of gunfire? This is the meat in that “well regulated” part of the well-regulated militia in the 2nd Amendment. We gotta find our common objective, otherwise we’re just spinning our wheels here.

Even Sarah Palin, who I thought was totally unprepared for the position she sought, would have understood that example.  :o)

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 3, 2010 at 5:54 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, January 3 at 4:23 pm,

You are using a “point of agreement” with me as an expedient to mischaracterize and misrepresent what I say, as a means to get in front of and control dialogue, perception and understanding; and thereby, validate your own willfully obfuscatory mischaracterization of what I have said; in a Hitleresque effort to discredit me personally.  YOUR subjective machinations and self-serving opinion projecting and framing my behavior according to YOUR own outlook, opinion, and perception reveals who and what YOU are more than it does me, and is in no way definitive of anything other than who and what YOU are.  YOUR behavior in this regard is an attempt by YOU to influence the outlook, opinion, and perception of BR549 with regard to understanding what I say by subjectively accusing, condemning, denouncing, and demonizing me in order to frame what I say.

Why do YOU, OzarkMichael, Shenonymous, and Leefeller deny Hitleresque behavior; and then openly engage in Hitleresque behavior in the manner that you are doing?  It is because you don’t think BR549 or anyone else knows the difference, and for that reason you think you can deny your Hitleresque behavior and it doesn’t matter.  I think you are wrong about BR549 and the larger audience, also.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 3, 2010 at 5:42 pm Link to this comment

Thank you Shenonymous. I would only ask of everyone that we all try to reconsider what points others are trying to make here or elsewhere. Somewhere, among the multitude of retorts can usually be found people who care about the cause but have yet to find a solution that works for them. Same goes for my canoe-mate Thomas. He sounds like someone with a wealth of experience and knowledge but, like us, had reached a point where his views just didn’t seem to be getting conveyed, let alone accepted. It is a challenge for all of us.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 3, 2010 at 4:44 pm Link to this comment

It took a large heart to make that post BR549, and I do appreciate it.  You not
only took time to look back, you reflected on what you saw.  Very unusual for
the ordinary Truthdigger.  You show yourself to be a worthwhile person to
read.  I have been posting on TD for over two years and occasionally I am
found to be grating on some peoples’ sensibilities.  I explained myself in my
last post so no need to repeat.  You certainly deserve to stand alone and to
enjoy whatever jewels of insight you have.  I offer my apologies for jumping, no
leaping, into the emotional abyss and unfairly took a shot at you.  I would have
to look back myself to see how and why that manifested.  I promise, though, to
not analyze it here on TD.  You remind me of the peacekeeper William Ury who
wrote the neat little but frank text, neat meaning well-written and compact,
The Third Side.  I offer my hand in a pledge for a cessation of any further
growling or maligning.  I look forward to your perceptions.  Yes it is better to
work towards some better life than to promote further tension.  It is a step in
the direction of a civil humanity.  Thank you.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 3, 2010 at 3:20 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, ThomasG, and Night Gaunt, et al,

Everyone one of you has presented perfectly valid aspects of the same problem present in our society, but we tend to have become so polarized within our own levels of understanding that we have little room to contemplate those of other contributors.

While I did attempt to go back and view the “War of Language” forum, for some reason, I could not seem to bring it up. Go figure. Anyway, I did go further back into this thread and found where even I had taken a potshot at Leefeller for his having embraced Fox News. (Sorry, Lee!) Most of the banter seemed to
have originated on the second page of posts, and it was here that I think that
too many of us were guilty and then began pointing fingers. Hey, we’re human.

Shenonymous, I don’t mean to single you out here, sincerely, but I had originally started to constructively comment on your pieces and then your demeanor seemed to have changed, ..... as did that of ThomasG and a couple others I’m not recalling at the moment, but that’s not the point.

Since some of you have relegated ThomasG to my canoe, I have to mention that his commentary became a bit caustic on Page 2, as well. My point is that here we are arguing about which side of the political aisle is doing the most damage, doing our best to convey to others the legitimacy of our thinking, when in fact, behind closed doors, the majority of our politicians have all but banded together to thwart any attempt by any rational person to unravel the disease state they have created at our expense .... and that is exactly where they want us to be; consumed with arguing amongst ourselves. If it ever came to having to battle it out all over again with the government, it is hoping we will be so disorganized that it’d just walk right over us. It is of little wonder then why we have so many splinter factions that have popped up over the years

Each of us has contributed bits of wisdom that we have no doubt wished to share with others, and then we have engaged in lashing out and taking pot shots when our pearls of wisdom fail be be embraced or are challenged. Whether it has been out of frustration or whatever, we really all came here to help find answers to our own questions about how to address this plague that has beset our country’s political system.

Anyway, let’s call a truce and realize how much more we have in common than not. The sad part of this discussion is how small the number of contributors is, and that even when you round up ALL the contributors to ALL the articles on ALL the websites, would that be enough to influence any meaningful change? The majority of Americans will be glued to some inane game on TV, today, unwittingly dumping their energies out into the universe instead of becoming educated to the real issues.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, January 3, 2010 at 12:23 pm Link to this comment

“To me the Obelisk of Devolution in both a figurative and literal sense is the totalitarian directed Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST New World Order that is being usher into the United States and the World.”-ThomasG

Here I agree with you, the Dominionists want such a kind of theocratic corporate hive all American red, white and blue. They are a mixed bunch but their core values and way of looking at the world are very close. Maybe in how they look a Samma-El (Lucifer) but that is petty compared to the Holy American Empire Incorporated they want.

“To me you are a prating savant preaching prattle with shallow savant understanding that you misperceive as wisdom.”-ThomasG

There you go again, telling us who you are by mislabeling others. You would drown in her intellectual depths which frightens you. Especially that Shenonymous is female and that bothers you more than me as a male. [Considering the vitriol I’ve seen.]

“I have been trying to dialogue with Shenonymous, OzarkMichael, Night-Gaunt and Leefeller for a very long time, and all I have received from them is fulminating and equivocating sophistry and propaganda in support of Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISM; all four of them have said outright that it is their job to dispute anything and everything I say on Truthdig and that they are all together in disputing whatever I say.”-ThomasG

BR549 if you just investigate that you will find why we have such a problem with the robotic prevaricator of invection, ThomasG.

I would add that Ozark Michael (a Republican) has called out ThomasG on his use of the “Mein Kampf” as his, and MarthaA‘s guide book to fight NS and its relatives. 16 times times he has worked through that noxious volume to show point for point how they use it to further their agenda. What does ThomasG do? Nothing but rant about “attacking the messenger” but doesn’t refute one or even say that he has actually read “Mein Kampf!” How can one trust such a messenger? Would you BR549?

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 3, 2010 at 11:36 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, January 3 at 12:13 pm,

YOU and your chorus willfully mischaracterize my positions with your fulminating and equivocating shallow, savant, prating, prattle that accuses, condemns, denounces, and demonizes me as a witness and a messenger, rather than ingenuously responding to the message of my posts.

Rather than participate and contribute, YOU and your chorus express your disgust, rage, and outrage for what I say and about me personally in the same manner that the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS have from the time of Goldwater through Reagan, Bush I, and Bush II that has led the United States into Deindustrialization for cheap Asian labor, Borrow and Spend Governance that has bankrupted the nation, Financialization for short-term profit, and Deregulation that resulted in the biggest financial bubble the world has ever known that required tens of trillions of dollars of socialized resources to recapitalize Wall Street — the collapse of Privatized TOXIC Capital — without equitable benefit to the American Populace that were forced by the U.S. Government to provide the money that they and generations of their progeny will have to go without to pay for.

When you support what the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS and the complicit New Democrats, the Democratic Leadership Council,DLC, and Blue Dog Democrats have done, as previously indicated, you become a part of the problem, rather than a part of the solution.

If you want respect from me, be a part of the solution, participate and contribute to a solution, rather than whine that I and others have not given YOU all of the answers, while continuing to spew the vitriol of sophistry, propaganda, disgust, rage, and outrage to accuse, condemn, denounce, and demonize me personally and everything I say.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 3, 2010 at 8:53 am Link to this comment

BR549, January 3 at 2:57 am,

I have been singing the tune of your post for many years; that the problem is duopoly and that the solution is a Multi-Party Political SystemShenonymous, and her chorus, disagrees and attacks me personally for my efforts.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 3, 2010 at 8:51 am Link to this comment

BR549, January 3 at 2:57 am,

I have been singing the tune of your post for many years; that the problem is duopoly and that the solution is a Multi-Party Political SystemShenonymous, and her chorus, disagrees and attacks me personally for my efforts.

I have been singing the tune of your post for many years; that the problem is duopoly and that the solution is

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 3, 2010 at 8:13 am Link to this comment

To set the record straight from my perception not from a Throne of Arrogance,
but you be the judge:

ThomasG for the last couple of months has been on a mission.  That mission is
made perfectly clear in each and every post on every forum on which he
participates.  For him, no other view is permitted.  He knows, or thinks, he is
absolutely right.  Reactively, he wants to be the instrument of destruction of
what he sees as a virulent and socially damaging political element in this
country.  And he wants to enlist an army of others to join him in his mission of
annihilation.  Some are attracted to such rampage.  It is in their personality to
wage ferocity.  Many others are not!  At the same time he wants to substitute
not only his economic program for the one that is current at the moment, he
also wants to replace the capitalistic base of this country with socialism.  He
might have a point, and could rationally convince others to his cause, but
because he rails and rants instead, he refuses to express to what degree he
believes to be the economic basis for a government he has received strong
resistance.  Just how much socialism does he think would make the corrections
he thinks are necessary is one reasonable question?  He deflects, and says
“whatever it will take.”  That is a complete dodge and shows he does not know
what he is talking about.  It also means he wants a complete change in the way
this country is governed by election of representative officials and the crafting
of governance with a three branch system, with one of the branches split into
what is called a bicameral system of legislators, a group called representatives
and the other called senators.  The other two branches most conscious citizens
know are the executive or president’s seat, and the judicial or the department
of justice called a supreme court, or the court of last appeal.

A few others and I have expressed disagreement with ThomasG who think the
financial structure of this country seriously needs fixed but does not want to
replace this country with Socialism.  We acknowledge and accept there is
already a large measure of social programs that puts the agent of socialism as
part of the equation of government.  ThomasG went into an attack mode not
the likes of which has ever been seen on these pages before.  On this forum,
but more notably on the War of Language forum.  To understand, one would
have to research forums from their early moments and most do not want to do
that nor have the time.  So what is here is only a thin surface of what has been
a nasty history.  Judgments are made on a small sample.  ThomasG’s
opponents have not only defended themselves but have engaged in bloody
retaliation, street fighting in a manner of speaking.  The nature of his
opponents however is not a simple matter either.  Of the four he identifies as
his enemies, one is an avowed conservative Republican who is a daredevil
taking the brunt of ThomasG’s assault, but the other three are declared liberals
who have shown their sympathies and compassions for the liberal social
perspective although more centrist in their liberalism than many on this
website, who do not espouse a conservative view in the least, but who disagree
with the socialist manifesto declared by ThomasG.  Because of his intemperate
nature, which is evidenced in the graphics of his emotionally charged writings,
ThomasG is incensed at anyone who disagrees with him.  And if there are more
than one he cleverly commences to attempt character assassination then
throws them into a fictionalized group that sets them up to be an adversary to
attack.  Sweet strategy.  He believes in preemptive attacks.  Read his blogging
history to see it as plain as day.  There is no such phrase in his lexicon called
civil discussion.  He verbally bashes heads and even proposes that real bats be
used to bash real heads.  Now is this sanity?

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 2, 2010 at 10:57 pm Link to this comment

Her Highness said, “Either I have a lame-ass lofty self imposed position and am
Queen of Arrogance or I have low self-esteem.  Which is it? ”

The first condition is caused by the second. Now I understand why she couldn’t
follow my line of thought before.

Anyway, ThomasG, I have no beef with Republicans. I have no beef with
Democrats. What does concern me is blind obedience to strictly one party,
thinking that any hard and fast alignment is going to somehow save the
country or the planet. The corruption is on both sides of
the aisle and until they abolish porkbarreling and lobbying ...... and develop a backbone and some personal integrity, we all get screwed. The
flip side of this is how corporations contribute to BOTH campaigns, not really
caring which side wins, but only being in a position to better their corporate bottom lines.

Washington has turned into a Red Light District and every politician (well,
most, anyway) have their price. Rather than voting on bills for their own merits,
the system has become so prostituted that it is the taxpayers who continually
get shafted, whether they are Republicans, Democrats, or whatever. Every
increase in the level of “administration” is yet one more opportunity for
politicians to redirect small slivers of that large pie for their own benefit, and
the further into an appropriations bill they can bury it, the harder it is for the
taxpayers to find out what happened.

So my only advice, for whatever it’s worth, is don’t be so blind as to think that one particular party is going to be able to solve our problems. When people refer to the Republicrats, that’s what they mean; that any forced distinctions only obscure what is really going on in Washington and that by being forced to decide between two parties with virtually identical hidden agendae just makes for a lot of bickering and disappointment.

As long as we at the bottom of the voting ladder keep arguing amongst ourselves, erroneously thinking that “our” party (whichever one that is) is going to somehow solve “the problem”, we stay so occupied in controversy that we never challenge the major issues that need to be addressed. We lose more civil
liberties, get further into debt, and the system becomes so complex that no one can explain what the hell happened.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 2, 2010 at 9:37 pm Link to this comment

Our disrespect is mutual, ThomasG.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 2, 2010 at 9:34 pm Link to this comment

Either I have a lame-ass lofty self imposed position and am Queen of Arrogance
or I have low self-esteem.  Which is it?  Queens have a high self-esteem,
especially if they have Bentleys with a Jeeves as a driver!  You might pull your
thoughts better together and decide which I am so you can call me the right
names, BR549.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 9:26 pm Link to this comment

BR549, January 3 at 12:31 am,

I have been trying to dialogue with Shenonymous, OzarkMichael, Night-Gaunt and Leefeller for a very long time, and all I have received from them is fulminating and equivocating sophistry and propaganda in support of Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISM; all four of them have said outright that it is their job to dispute anything and everything I say on Truthdig and that they are all together in disputing whatever I say.  I have therefore concluded that talking past Shenonymous and her chorus is the best solution to dealing with her disingenuous, fulminating, and equivocating sophistry, propaganda, and personal attacks.

I have no beef personally with Shenonymous, OzarkMichael, Night-Gaunt or Leefeller either, and I also have no respect for any of them either, because of their past behavior, so I say what I choose to say to the greater audience by talking past them and try not to let them draw me into personal contention; however, all four of them seem to be over-emotional and prone to attacking me personally, rather than responding to my commentary.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 2, 2010 at 8:31 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG, I have no beef with OzarkMichael, Night-Gaunt, and Leefeller, or
anyone else for that matter. They haven’t pretended to be someone they
weren’t, as is the case with What’s-Her-Face, and then attack me to defend
some lame-ass lofty, self imposed, position. You paid me a mild compliment
and now, because she has some issue with you, I have to pay the price by
becoming the focus of all this woman’s anger and frustration. So, it’s obvious that my having made some commentary that YOU agreed with just irritated the hell out of her. Gawd, I hope she has no children!

==============

Why address her inane questions? She finds it necessary to continually critique
everyone’s and my input (an obvious control issue) rather than continue any
constructive dialogue on them, so if she thinks she’s going to gain any measure
of respect from me, she lost that when she lost control with that poisoned
keyboard of hers.

She stated to me, “You think you are a knower and false knowers irritate the
hell out of me!  You think you are right and sit on an imagined throne where no
one can challenge what you say.” ......... Talk about the pot calling the kettle
black. Sounds like projection, to me, so perhaps I wasn’t far off my mark in my
analysis.

She showed her true colors on Dec 30 when she again spewed her lofty disdain by saying, “It has become boring.  So unless this forum elevates a notch in interest, bye bye.” I’m surprised this Queen of Arrogance hadn’t asked Jeeves to pull up the Bentley and then make some caustic reference to the peasantry here.

ThomasG, Back in 1999, I was asked to help moderate a list, which I did for
several years, and was able to keep things civil because, as I continued to
remind people, “When we argue about religion or politics, it isn’t about the
religion or the politics; it’s all about the arguing. Some people just NEVER got
that concept; that they brought into a conversation or a relationship a
steamer-trunk full of dysfunctional baggage and then tried to leave it on
someone else’s doorstep. Thus, they had to pick everyone else apart in order to deal with their own low self esteem.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, January 2, 2010 at 8:01 pm Link to this comment

I don’t mind if people think my ideas are preposterous.  In fact, I think everyone should have a few preposterous ideas now and then—it’s like putting some pepper in the soup.

Usually, I am cursed with rationality, under what karmic burden I cannot imagine.  But every now and then I am let off the leash.  Woof, woof!

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 7:18 pm Link to this comment

BR549, January 3 at 12:41 am,

For myself, I have found the best strategy for Shenonymous, OzarkMichael, Night-Gaunt, and Leefeller is to talk past them, so that the greater audience can see who and what they really are, rather than what they pretend to be.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 7:10 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, January 2 at 10:29 pm,

I do not think your attempts at triumphant exceptionalism is going to work for you with BR549.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 2, 2010 at 6:29 pm Link to this comment

Your bluster does not phase me BR549.  You attack me just as ThomasG
complains is done to him.  You do not address what I say, you call me names,
attack my character.  How dare you!  If you think for an instant that these
forums are a place for civility, then you should take a look at the TD forum
history of your new mentor ThomasG.  Quite frankly Scarlett I don’t give a damn
what you think.  Anarcissie is well able to speak for herself, we have interacted
for over a year and I’ve never known her to be daunted by Shenonymous for an
instant.  But you seem to be.  The reason I “ripped” your contribution apart is
because you are an arrogant pontiff as well!  You think you are a knower and
false knowers irritate the hell out of me!  You think you are right and sit on an
imagined throne where no one can challenge what you say.  No wonder your
brother hid behind Plato, et al.  Maybe he realizes you can find the bathroom
door but are not so brilliant.  You pontificate with your near beer analogies and
expect to receive applause for your sloppiness.  You might be able to wow your
patients, they are in grave need,  but here you have to do better.  You do not
set the parameters for what anyone dares to say.  ThomasG has attacked me
for months now and I fight back.  If you don’t like my style take a hike.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 2, 2010 at 5:41 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,
Don’t be such an arrogant and pompous ass.

You posted to ThomasG on 12/29: “You are really stupid.”
You posted to ThomasG on 12/30: “How arrogant.” and “You might read Plato
more thoroughly if you think you can act as a gadfly.  You are very clumsy at it
so far.”

You posted to Anarcissie on 12/30: ” ... it looks like you think political
perspectives are imprinted on the genes. That is about as preposterous a
theory as I’ve heard.” .....................Actually I understood what Anarcissie was alluding to without having the opportunity to even read the Psychology Today article. I don’t think it takes any level of rocket science to figure out that we don’t have a Red or Blue gene, but that we are apt to have certain logical tendencies that steer us toward what we perceive to be SAFER GROUND, whether literally, in the case of avoiding a lion, or philosophically, with respect to setting a safer political course for ourselves and family. Whether it be nature or nurture is a good question, but oftentimes gene expression only shows itself
under stress and we still have a LONG way to go before we truly understand
genetics.

Today, for some reason, you felt the need to rip apart my contribution to this
discussion for reasons I no not; yet ANOTHER bad day at work, haven’t been
laid in a while, who the hell knows? But I didn’t appreciate it, and quite frankly,
I think it was very rude of you to adopt such a posture. If you spent more time
attempting to actually read what other people are trying to convey, before
spewing your vitriol, you might learn something new.

Most everyone here has tried to be civil and do nothing but both contribute and learn from others. I may use analogies because it usually gives other people a different perspective to view the same topic being discussed, and past experience has shown that people will often nod yes about something, when they are near clueless. In the medical arena, I use analogies nearly EVERY DAY, and when one bothers to learn what vocation their patient is in, it helps IMMENSELY for a practitioner to be able to illustrate their health problem within a more understandable context, one that the patient might work with every day. Then, their lightbulb comes on! You didn’t seem to even understand Anarcissie without picking her apart, so that makes me wonder if you even grasped my content.

I have a younger sibling who, for the last 50 years, still hasn’t been able to address his emotions responsibly. In order to feel something, he has to elicit some exaggerated response out of someone else, so that he can have something to react to. He will taunt and aggravate the crap out of someone until they start looking for that hidden box of bullets in the back room, in order to get them all worked up so he can gauge his own emotional issues.

What’s his ploy? He constantly hides within the works of Plato and Homer. (He loves quoting the Iliad.) He will quote passages from Hegel and Nietcshe that I can only assume are pertinent to the conversation at hand, but that’s only to cover up a massive insecurity complex when in fact he can’t actually have a NORMAL conversation with anyone. He’s brilliant but can’t manage to find the bathroom door.

If you wish to contribute, it sounds like you have a very broad knowledge base to draw from, but taking cheap shots is not appreciated. I don’t care for it, and I don’t think the others do either.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 5:30 pm Link to this comment

Truthdig Web Master:

Shenonymous’, January 2 at 11:33 pm post that my below post answered, disappeared, and I am wondering what the explanation is???????

“By ThomasG, January 2 at 8:49 pm #

Shenonymous, January 2 at 11:33 pm,

Are you saying, then, that you are an Epsilon-Minus Semi Moron and that you do not perceive what the whole discussion about the obelisk and “Brave New World” is all about; if that is so, stick with your elevator, rather than try to pretend that you are an Alpha?”

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 4:49 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, January 2 at 11:33 pm,

Are you saying, then, that you are an Epsilon-Minus Semi Moron and that you do not perceive what the whole discussion about the obelisk and “Brave New World” is all about; if that is so, stick with your elevator, rather than try to pretend that you are an Alpha?

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 4:37 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, January 2 at 7:32 pm,

Again, Shenonymous, what does what you have to say mean to anyone other than yourself and your own Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Chorus? —————— Nothing.

You apparently value your reflexive world within your box of mirrors that does not allow you a view beyond the confines of the box of mirrors where your mind resides, and I do not.  In your self-deluded world, you imagine that others should credit you with your own delusions having value and that will not happen from anyone other than those of your own Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Chorus or someone that you have power over as a student, if you are indeed a teacher.

To me you are a prating savant preaching prattle with shallow savant understanding that you misperceive as wisdom.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 2, 2010 at 4:33 pm Link to this comment

While BNW was a startling story, it was a fictional what if.  Huxley knew that. 
He did not pretend it was reality nor that it reflected any specific reference in
his society, He had amorphous target, like science run amuck. It parodies
Christianity as religious practice in the early 20th century. It reflected a
“possible” world, as if it could happen.  You are appropriating his structure as if
it were yours.  And bastardizing it as you go.  You do not show how BNW’s
society of ABGDs and Es are like the RR-WCENWO.  You just claim it is.  As it
stands, your analogy is empty.

Literally there is no Obelisk of Devolution.  You are using it strictly figuratively. 

Statements uttered by the characters in BNW have no more depth than comic
book characters.  It is a commentary on scientific mass producing human
beings, who are decanted not born.  The five classes you mentioned, ThomasG
represents a predetermined class structure from intelligent Alphas to the
moronic Epsilons.  They are bred for specific purposes.  So a slave class is
produced.  The world is run by the ten controllers.  That is your new world
order.  They seem to have a similar attitude as you do, ThomasG that history is
bunk, blah, blah, blah.  The savage John mistakes Shakespeare as a guide to
reality.  Mistaking analogy for reality is a gross mistake.  See how life imitates
art.  Let us not forget this is science Fiction.  When fiction is mistaken for
reality you are in big psychic trouble.

The story is a launchpad for discussion.  Your diatribe precludes discussion. 
There is no analogy.  Brave New World is a what if story.  It highlights the
threats that society could develop if it went unchecked by rational beings. 
Huxley was concerned about the dangers of the misuse of biology, physiology
and psychology to achieve community, identity and stabilty that ultimately self-
destructs.  Huxley himself was English upper-class.  He incorporated the
humorous possibilities in his serious ideas because he enjoyed humor.  And, as
educated in English schools, games were important and was always ready to
make jokes with words and ideas.  He played the word game with the names of
his characters.  I.e., Lenina after Lenin. And he took the name Utopia from
Thomas More, it means ‘No Place” in Greek and really harkens to Plato’s
Republic. It has kinship to Erewhon, Butler’s story which is an anagram of
NoWhere.  Clearly Huxley story is satire and he was a great admirer of H. G.
Wells.  He was making fun of science, religion and the notion of what the future
could be like.  How can you possibly think your analogy fits, ThomasG?  Do you
imagine you are John Savage, who saw the flaws of society?  Do not forget he
commits suicide at the end.  It ultimately was a warning about science as an
instrument of power.  Make your analogy now, ThomasG if you can.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 3:49 pm Link to this comment

BR549, January 2 at 6:24 pm,

BR549 said:  “This NWO has little room for people who know too much or strive to make better all of mankind. The way they keep people under control is to dumb them down and consider them no better than cattle or sheep, using them only to produce just enough to keep their dysfunctional NWO engine running. That engine will never reach its maximum potential because the one bad plug that is needed to keep ithe speed down will also not allow it to speed over that collapsing bridge it just entered onto.”

ThomasG’s answer:  Aldous Huxley in “Brave New World” saw a society of Alphas, Betas, Gammas, Deltas and Epsilons created in the Central London Hatchery and Conditioning Center under the motto of Community, Identity, and Stability.

To me the Obelisk of Devolution in both a figurative and literal sense is the totalitarian directed Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST New World Order that is being usher into the United States and the World.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 2, 2010 at 3:32 pm Link to this comment

One must be careful that analogies remain analogies and not mistake them for
reality.  Using analogies means to imagine “what it might be like” not the way it
is.  For each of your analogies, ThomasG and BR549, please show where they
are the reality and not imagined scenarios.  Analogies may be valid but they are
not necessarily the truth.  Logically analogies are ultimately false since their
premises are all hypothetically based.  The premises are what ifs not actualities. 
The Matrix one is good though, really good!  lol The amount of wishful
thinking between you two is a laugh riot.  But I’m glad that ThomasG has found
a bosom buddy.  He has been waging his war by his lonesome and without
martha for quite some time now. (He won’t let her out of the trunk though.  He
is having too much fun.)

About the body part that ‘hoards nutrients’ I’d be tickled to know which one it
is that you think.  Unless you are talking about the liver that is a distribution
center that converts nutrition into molecules that are needed in throughout the
body’s organs via the bloodstream, like skin, liver, pancreas, etc., The
distribution is programmed to happen according to need.  It is energy in
energy out.  It is by genetic design not independently prescribed by some
monster-egocentric liver organ. 

Analogies are comparisons that uses a framework to assist understanding new
or obscure information. They work by comparing one thing to another in order
to emphasize some shared quality. If one of the two items is unfamiliar, that
shared quality can help make it understandable. Or it can cause someone to
consider something familiar in a new way.  It is important to make sure the
intended recipient of the analogy understands the relationship of the
components.  However if both elements of the analogy are arcane, the effort of
providing the analogy is lost.

You assume your analogy of the societal and economic pyramid, ThomasG,
with the “Republican Revolution…..” is obvious and in spite of accusing me of
pedantic parsing you have not shown your analogy to be clear nor coherent. 
You are self-deluded and think you are lucid but you are not.  You want
people to guess at what you are talking about.  You use terms as if they came
out of a grab bag, and that is my analogy of your harangue.  You get an F in my
class too.  My goodness, N-G gives you bad grades, I give you bad grades,
what are we to do with you?  Remedial reading for you it is!  I suggest you read
Plato’s Parmenides.  It is a demonstration on how to teach something.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 2, 2010 at 2:24 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous,
When I carried over ThomasG’s mention of the obelisk, it was with the understanding that Kubrick was not some gifted fellow who just happened to pull this concept out of some daydream he had. One thing he did do was unleash that concept within an ever more popular science fiction loving audience; pushing the envelope of understanding within a format that more people were now enjoying.

Nevertheless, I can conceive of a scenario where we could devolve. That might show up as your “steps backward”, but over a longer span of time. People can just be trained downward to a point where they lack enough critical thinking; as a result of cerebral atrophy, if you will.

By the way, you’re mistaken about parts of the the body not hoarding or manipulating nutrients, but that’s another conversation. I’ll try a different example.

This NWO has little room for people who know too much or strive to make better all of mankind. The way they keep people under control is to dumb them down and consider them no better than cattle or sheep, using them only to produce just enough to keep their dysfunctional NWO engine running. That engine will never reach its maximum potential because the one bad plug that is needed to keep ithe speed down will also not allow it to speed over that collapsing bridge it just entered onto.

At the risk of using too many analogies here, that is when some huge asteroid is discovered, that one that is speeding its way toward Earth and they realize that there isn’t enough technology to do anything about it, they completely disregard the possibility of an enlightened body of humanity being able to actually will the asteroid off course, but that would require a higher level of understanding that they intentionally deny everyone else to reach. They can’t have it both ways.

Here is where we can see those tall towers feeding off the electrical energy of humans in The Matrix (I). Even there, the machines would be stuck with harvesting energy off humans as far as the humans had evolved up to that point of their enslavement, saying nothing of what levels of energy could have potentially been harvested had the mind of man been allowed to evolve another thousand years or so.

It’s like those cases where they put a yogi in a chest of ice and he would emerge hours later, having melted the ice, himself feeling hot, where the average person would have frozen to death or developed hypothermia at the very least.

This NWO order crap has no place to go. The fear and lack of spiritual connection exhibited by these people is what will ultimately do them in, a spiritual implosion. Unfortunately, many millions of people may die in the process, but a system that has no respect for God, ultimately has no respect for itself; it’s a form of self loathing. (I use the term God in a spiritual sense, here, not a religious one.)

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 1:46 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, January 2 at 7:55 pm,

Aldous Huxley in “Brave New World” saw devolution of the societal populace forced by those at the top of the societal and economic pyramid to serve the interests of those who occupy the top of the social and economic pyramid; this is what I see with the so called “Republican Revolution” of Goldwater, Reagan, Bush I and Bush II  and their Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST “New World Order”.

BR549’s analogy is valid, irregardless of your savant attempt at pedantic parsing to show otherwise.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 1:09 pm Link to this comment

BR549, November 20, 2009 at 2:28 am,

BR549 said:  “Better yet ........ Send them all to the pen in 2010!”

ThomasG’s answer:  A truly enlightened view in my humble opinion.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 1:05 pm Link to this comment

BR549, January 2 at 4:10 pm,

Thanks for your support.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 2, 2010 at 12:55 pm Link to this comment

The analogy of the body hoarding nutrients does not hold up since the body
cannot do that nor can any other organism.  It is the nature of the organism to
distribute nourishment as it is designed to.  For an analogy to work, the parts
have to be isomorphic.

Ideals are models and rarely does reality achieve model status.  While it is most
healthy to try to be as perfect as the ideal, it is real to understand how
extraneous factors influence the prevention of becoming a perfect reflection of
the ideal.  What is putrid to one culture is perfume to another.  Learning how to
not only tolerate others views but interchange them is probably the best plan. 
But that comes with the insight that one’s own idiosyncracy is not The Ideal. 
The same with political views.  If any one political view was rotten and not
propitious for its society, it dies such as nazism died in Germany.  That doesn’t
mean the impulse disappeared since that kind of totalitarian mentality still
exists today, and always did in one form or another.  But when discovered it is
soundly contested.  This scenario fits with BR549’s last post.  So we are not as
far apart as might be thought at first sight. 

The idealism of the progressive evolutionary oblelisk is not a new idea, was not
a new idea of Clarke’s nor Kubrick’s, or just thought of in this forum!  It is the
project of every humanist and realist who bothers to think and express their
insights.  I do not see a devolution any more than there ever was the impulse
from the prehistoric time that men resisted change.  I do not see evolution
cyclic but rather spiraling from two steps forward one step backward, the two
steps forward again.  I do believe history has shown a progress of humanity. 
Except from a provincial perspective it might look as though a devolution is
happening, it really isn’t from an overarching view.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 2, 2010 at 12:10 pm Link to this comment

Referring to “obelisks”, I feel ThomasG is right on target. They are but points of
focus, whether those around them actually have the where-with-all to
understand the deeper implications of those points or not.

While I had been a 27 year non-stop Republican in the past, something
snapped me out of it and had me look deeper into the issues. My brother and
sister, on the other hand, both former hard core Democrats, have gradually
swung over to being Republican. And when I try to discuss issues with them,
they aren’t familiar with any; they can only parrot the same Beckian and
O’Reillyan drivel. For myself, I am still very fiscally conservative, but that
doesn’t mean that I would not choose to help educate those less fortunate so
that they could help themselves get out of a rut. To do otherwise would be to
further perpetuate the devolutionary aspect of ThomasG’s argument and only
create a further drain on whatever seemingly efficient model of government I
continue to dream about.

Put into a physiologic context, you can’t have one part of the body hoarding all the nutrients without creating a disease state elsewhere in the body. Since we all inhabit this planet together, the ideal would be to have had the US set some model of stewardship, help educate the less fortunate, and ultimately everyone would realize the need to conserve energy and constructively down-populate the planet to a more sustainable level. The body accomplishes this through what is known as apoptosis, or programmed cell death. That’s in my ideal world. Either party could sponsor a change toward those ends, but not while they are corrupt with the filth they currently operate within.

It may SEEM like a socialist agenda, but it really isn’t, since it is more about attrition than extermination. Underlying the whole
system is the need to preserve the unique ethnic heritages that make up our individual histories. Thus, just as we have liver cells and lung cells, we have Afghanis and Namibians. Humans are, after all, social beings, and we need look no further than to Stanford neurobiologist Roberts Sipolski’s work with baboons for the last 30 years to get a sense of what our NEEDS are. And we can’t fulfill
those needs being totally homogenized and RFIDed. We still require small
community groups; at least that’s as far as our evolution has brought us.

Sipolski was shown on KCSM last March (?) and his experiments on stress bore
out one very interesting point. While he had been visiting this same troop of
baboons for decades, measuring cortisol and other hormone levels, and
determining BMIs up and down the chain of command, he had normally noticed
the stress symptoms occurring in those closer to the bottom when those at the
top were still allowed to abuse those under them. Everyone picked on someone
below them.

After returning to the site, one year, he found that an unrelated safari had left a shed containing either spoiled or poisoned meat stores. The baboon leaders had broken into the shed and, greedy as they were, stole all the meat for themselves and Sipolski noted that ..... all those at the top had died. When Sipolski noted the baboon behavior of the rest of the troop, they had all turned to nurturing one another and the aggression that had been perpetuated from the top down, before, was no longer there. So, to possibly address Shenonymous’ concern about holding any hope, there is one aspect; that sooner or later, this dysfunctional group of sub-human social malcontents known as the Bilderbergers, will eventually die off because they don’t serve any function in the evolution of man. Humanity can then get on with its business of following that evolutionary obelisk out into the universe.

My two cents. Hope I didn’t leave anyone out, here. Pardon my lack of brevity.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, January 2, 2010 at 10:58 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous said, ” I do not believe a third party candidate has a rat’s ass
chance in a trap of velveeta cheese of winning a general election nomination or
even a candidacy on the ticket.”

Well, all I can say is that if ever there was a time, this is it. After both the 2004
and 2008 elections, I had overlaid the broadcast territories of all those stations
across the US that aired Amy Goodman’s “Democracy Now” program against
the respective Red or Blue counties. With only a couple of exceptions, a very
clear pattern emerged. If people heard anything close to the REAL news, they
were able to put enough pieces together to at least think for themselves; at
least enough to swing those counties.

Unfortunately, Amy has apparently chosen to tone down her rhetoric and I have
switched over to Alex Jones more increasingly. Now, before too many people fly
off the handle on that one, I admit that I have to turn him off when he gets on
his Limbaughesque rants, but when he is normal, which is most of the time, he
can have a blistering array of qualified guest speakers that leave no doubt at all
as to what is going in this country.

I guess the bottom line is that this power elite is still struggling with the same
set of issues and that no matter how hard they have tried, the regimes that
they use to spread their twisted thinking always wind up like Hitler and
Mussolini. When I used that scenario of trussing up Cheney like Mussolini,
before, it was to illustrate a point, and perhaps if I personally were at some
point where I would be able to make a decision about him, I would probably
find myself abiding by the very same Constitution that he has so eager to
trample.

This next set of races will be interesting, since I can recall a couple races in
Texas, last time, where the Republican candidates had missed their filing
deadlines and when it went to court, the judge still allowed them to run. Why
have rules if we aren’t going to follow them? Why have any respect for the
judiciary if it flaunts its power over the people and fails to obey the law in the
first place?

I guess all we can do is educate as many people as possible and cross our
fingers, but with congressional popularity at an all time low, I think, now, even
Main Street America in the Grain and Bible Belts is getting fed up with this crap.

Report this
Leefeller's avatar

By Leefeller, January 2, 2010 at 10:07 am Link to this comment

Sorry I have been away for so long, but my concerns over Russ Limbaugh’s health problems exceed my own, what are we right wing extremists do do with out our guiding obelisk?

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 9:50 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, January 1 at 5:59 pm,

Shenonymous said: “Seems like a certain firm level of rational resolve is
required of the liberal quarter, but I am not encouraged they they have the
keeness of foresight or strength of integrity to get there.

If anyone can give me encouragement, I’d welcome it.

ThomasG’s answer:  Be the obelisk of evolution for the Left and Liberals, instead of being a reactive monkey to the obelisk of devolution of the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS; be proactive, instead of reactive——rather than wait like a monkey for something or someone else to show you the way.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, January 2, 2010 at 9:03 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 31, 2009 at 2:51 am (two),Night-Gaunt, December 31, 2009 at 3:50 am, and Night-Gaunt, December 31, 2009 at 2:05 am,

Obelisks of Evolution and Devolution

George Will and the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST Brave New World Order Physiocrat ilk support Privatized Ponzi Pyramid Scheme Capitalism; the obelisk that these people herald is an obelisk of devolution, rather than an obelisk of evolution for the American Populace.

The obelisk that Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS herald is the obelisk that brings the dawn of a Brave New World Order, financialization, control of world markets, world resources and social control on a world scale that was indicated by Aldous Huxley in “Brave New World” advocated by Charles Edward Merriam in “The Making of Citizens” and explained as a Working Model by Adam Smith in “The Wealth of Nations” and by Francois Quesnay in “The Economical Table”.

Francois Quesnay defines commerce in “The Economical Table” as that “which multiplies sales and purchases without multiplying things, a Ponzi Pyramid Scheme that when applied to the U.S. Economy and a New World Order Economy makes Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi Scheme small by comparison.

The vision of an obelisk that brings constructive evolution that is inclusive as in “2001: A Space Odyssey” was a vision of constructive evolution and benefit for all, but the vision of a Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST obelisk brings a “Brave New World Order” that is exclusively for those at the top of a permanently enshrined and institutionalized Social and Economic Pyramid; the obelisk of the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS is an obelisk of devolution———— we have evolved past being monkeys and we must learn to choose our obelisk, and know that the obelisk of the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMISTS is an obelisk that must be rejected.

The monkeys in Kubrick’s and Clark’s, “2001: A Space Odyssey” were unaware, and for that reason could not reject the obelisk; we are NOT monkeys—— we must be aware and vigilant, so that the Republican Right-Wing Conservative EXTREMIST obelisk of Goldwater, Reagan, Bush I and Bush II does not become the obelisk of our devolution back to monkeys that serve those at the top of the pyramid without benefit to the American Populace.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 1, 2010 at 1:59 pm Link to this comment

Not at all a rhetorical question, is it possible that a shallow ideologue such as
Palin could even get to first base with the Republican nomination?  Surely there
are other thugs who covet the position that would attempt to blow her out of
the water?  If there is even the slightest breeze thought in her direction
mannnn, there needs to be organization right now to counteract the probable
weakest candidate in the recent history of this country.  Not one blade of grass
ought to be allowed to grow.  Then the idiotic Beck, whose putrid screed has to
be neutralized and neutralized in an immutable way.  His screeching
derangement needs to be highlighted.  Problem is there are no charismatic
Democrats who can do it!  Or if there are they have not the talent to be as
sophistic as the general public appears to need to get their attention.  I do not
believe a third party candidate has a rat’s ass chance in a trap of velveeta
cheese of winning a general election nomination or even a candidacy on the
ticket.  Besides I have no faith in anyone, cynic me.  I’d still go with the liberal
Democrats before anyone else.  I don’t believe in wasting time or my money. 
Derisive songs have to be sung but there are no singers.  Wry and mocking wit
such as Carlin had who can capture the audience of the hoi polloi needs to be
discovered to bewitched the population.  I’m convinced it is passion that gets
action.  I’ve said that before.  It is unbelievable how little talent there is on this
side of the aisle.

Seems to be the way it works, the way you say reality is, Anarcissie.  Pretend
long enough and one does become the pretense for however long it is useful
until one’s doctrinaire beliefs resurfaces to command.  I fear you have it right
about the right-wing reactionaries in the workplace and their attraction to the
authoritarian structure. Seems like a certain firm level of rational resolve is
required of the liberal quarter, but I am not encouraged they they have the
keeness of foresight or strength of integrity to get there.

If anyone can give me encouragement, I’d welcome it.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, January 1, 2010 at 1:14 pm Link to this comment

Just the fact that more people watch and consider Palin & Beck as repositories not only of virtue and truth but also the intellectual fountainhead of their own points-of-view over say such real reporters like Olberman & Maddow should give pause. I have noticed some just lump them all together saying they are “six of one and 1/2 a dozen of the other” which is simplistic and shows a lack of knowledge of the subject and the peoples and their content of reporting. How does President Palin sit for any of you? To me it is like if a Scientologist were to become a leader of a country—how would that sit with the world? I find it to be a dangerous thing for they may have no standing outside of their groups.

With our compromised voting systems, closed mummified two-headed party corpse as the only official parties that can get elected puts us into a bind. Such a flawed & sabotaged system can only produce election monsters and twisted products. That is what corrupts our system and maintains it to this day.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, January 1, 2010 at 12:14 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous—“Brainwashing” is actually a hot term for a very common social process—people, especially in one another’s physical presence, try to get along, and this includes appearing to have similar opinions and tastes.  One becomes what one pretends to be, at least temporarily, so the solitary little conservative among the big liberals becomes a temporary liberal.

The work force does not cause a conversion experience among “conservatives” because most work is organized in an authoritarian manner, which comports with the conservative view of the world, even if the worker is ill-treated.  If the conservative had been temporarily liberalized, his or her encounter with workplace authoritarianism is most likely to cause a reconversion experience which the convert will see as a resumption of contact with reality.  The person predisposed to liberalism, on the other hand, will be offended by the authoritarianism and is likely to become more firmly liberal.

I should be using bushels of quotes here.  The terms “liberal” and “conservative” are especially suspect, part of the vague, muddled terminology of contemporary journalism and popcult.  Many strong opinions attributed to quote-liberals-end-of-quote, like the need for gun control and doing something about global warming / climate change, are argued in a highly authoritarian manner from authoritarian principles, while many “conservatives” take a view of the same subjects which favors autonomy and skepticism.  It is unfortunate that our vocabulary of discourse about politics and culture is so muddled.  But I’m doing the best I can (for a lazy person) with what I’ve got.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, January 1, 2010 at 8:57 am Link to this comment

Good morning Anarcissie - Aye, your division of the naturals seems to be
telescoped correctly.  Hume also said passion is the motivation for action.  How
to decide which passions to promote that are less self-serving and more far
reaching into the health of the society seems to be the essential question.

It also seems to be the case that hardly a radical conservative in college (as
there is that group too, usually a religiously flavored one) never change once
out into the workforce (could we liberals say “come to their senses?”

Regarding the brainwashing to which you refer, I wonder who are the
brainwashers?  I think brainwashing is always reactive and not really permanent
unless it is acute such as in a Jim Jones type affair, then it is fatally permanent. 
I think self-realized epiphanies are the only way to permanent altruism.  I
would revise my theory to include interactive dialogue along with education.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, January 1, 2010 at 8:24 am Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 31, 2009 at 2:51 am:
’... It doesn’t really matter, does it, Anarcissie whether or not critical thinking or intellection, which is a precondition for critical thinking, affects political attitudes in most people, but certainly education whether formal or through life experience or discussion with others, does.  Unless they, most people, are completely without a holographic brain.’

I got the idea you were talking about formal education, especially of the sort where the educatee is taken out of one environment, the home town, let us say, and placed in another, the college, where suddenly she or he is surrounded by people with different values and habits.  If the Psychology Today people are correct, what we might call “natural liberals” will tend to seek this experience and “natural conservatives” will tend to avoid it.  In the case of the latter, even if a conversion experience is induced, their return to the non-educational world will cause or permit a reconversion.  Hence we hear many tales of individuals who say they were liberals or radicals in college, but when they got out into the real world and had to get a job and so forth they came to their senses.  In my experience, this is a very popular anecdote and I think it fits the Psychology Today theory.  It is a mild form of brainwashing, and I don’t think brainwashing generally has permanent effects except where (as in the initial P.T. anecdote) the subject is already primed for a conversion experience.  Hence I don’t think education is likely to decrease the American public’s taste for people like Reagan and Palin.  It is as Hume said: reason is the slave of the passions.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 30, 2009 at 11:50 pm Link to this comment

Two dimensional thinkers like GWB & Palin are prominent examples, a 3-D who writes in 2-D is George Will there are others who think and speak in 3-D like Maddow & Olberman as examples.

Nature gives it to you and nurture forms it into what it is today. Some of it is still malleable after birth and reaching adulthood. For some ideology rules them, like Will and ignoring reality is good to them and creating their own reality is better. No matter what havoc it causes in the long run.

We are the naked ape who without our brains, bipedalism and opposing thumbs make us the most dangerous life form on the planet. Even though we have none of the morphology of predators. But even lions, tigers and bears follow Nature unlike us. That is our strength and greatest flaw. We all have the capacity to be a “Rogue Evita.”

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 30, 2009 at 10:51 pm Link to this comment

1. Interest tweaked again.
All simians are not alike.  Monkeys and apes are from different genetic lines as
are the simian without so much body hair, the human ape. Nevertheless, I am
feeling much more comfortable now that the conversation has turned to a
more familial topic.

FYI:  According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word “monkey” probably
originated in a German version of the Reynard the Fox fable.  In that version, a
character named Moneke is the son of Martin the Ape. The word Moneke may
have been derived from the Italian monna, which means “a female ape”. And no
distinction was made between the two species.  Oh well, we find sloppiness
everywhere.  The name Moneke likely persisted over time due to the popularity
of Reynard the Fox.  Must be where Leonardo got the title of his famous
painting Monna Lissa.

Actually the term ‘monkey’ is an artificial grouping; it is not a “good” taxon,
which is a group of one or more organisms thought to be a unit.  Focus on the
word artificial.  Instead ‘monkey’ is a paraphyletic group, as in “fish”.  A “good”
taxon, as most modern biologists consider it, is a monophyletic group, that is,
a group consisting of all the evolutionary descendants of a single ancestor
species. The term ‘monkey’ covers all flat, broad nosed platyrrhines, and some
nostrils-downward catarrhines, like one or two of my relatives who think they
are better than others, but excludes the apes.  Too bad Aunt Priscilla, in spite
of your nose, having no tail, you have to be grouped or trooped with the Apes. 
Apes are more intelligent thatn monkeys anyway.  A group of monkeys may be
referred to as a mission, a tribe, or a troop.

Since I don’t have a tail, me and mine are included in the ape family. I have
admitted to being related to orangutans on another forum.  Oh well.  Let’s get
beyond this falderol.  Kubrick uses simians (actually chimps, not monkeys, but
he should have used gorillas that are the closest hominid to humans) as a loud
request to transform human civilization before it precludes survival.  Of course
in Planet of the Apes, Breck answers the inquiry about why apes and/or
monkeys are treated so badly by humans as they do cats and dogs, that their
kind were once “our” ancestors.  “Man.” he answers, “was born of the ape and
there’s still an ape curled up inside every man.  The beast must be whipped into
submission…shackled in chains and [we taint the apes, we poison their guts,
and when they hate us they are hating the dark side of humanity].”  Moon
Watcher, as per Clarke, performs as the leader of the apes that represents the
pre-human condition and discoverer of tool use, and will be replaced by the
intervening humans only to be replaced by the ‘starchild,’ the next stage of
evolution.  Of course the Planet of the Apes is much more pessimistic, where
the Earth winds up in the hands of a ‘lesser’ species.  We have to also
remember these films were made during the Cold War arms race.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 30, 2009 at 10:51 pm Link to this comment

2.
Both films brings focus to the human/animal boundary that is distributed in a
dialectical and complex way in human culture.  Most of philosophy, as noted by
Jacques Derrida, has relied on the contrast between human and animal without
ever observing anything of animal being, and argued that humans must rethink
ethics once account is taken that the frontier between animal and human no
longer forms a single indivisible line.  Both films demonstrated that connection
between the species as a foundation of human subjectivity and a culture of
technological superiority that produces the threat of human annihilation.  We
face that threat with the advancement of nuclear weaponry in the world today. 
I did hear Obama say he would initiate a reduction in the American store of
nuclear weapons and talks with the Russians has already taken place… a couple
of times.

Using the figure, metaphor, analogy, a la ThomasG’s triad, of the ape, both
films argue for the need to rethink what it means to be human.  There is no
doubt Kubrick/Clarke story is about human evolution and the triumph of
humans through technology to avoid the vicissitudes of the struggle for
survival as he learns more and more how to protect himself.  Kubrick theorizes
an evolution from ape to man, which is countered by anthropology today, but
nevertheless his serves the function of pointing out evolution and a concern
with the future, and of course the past, of human subjectivity. To see the full
effect one needs to review the segments of the film from the moment the
“hominids” are eating vegetation, the frame of aggression towards a tapir, then
the watering hole where tension that is limited to posturing precludes complete
peaceful sharing of the resources.  But no bodily contact happens.  Next scene
we see the leopard, and the simians in the cave fearing predators. They then
discover the obelisk, which really are tool also, and they attempt to dominate it
with the ordinary postures of ape aggression.  We are made to notice Moon
Watcher’s rising cognition that the bone could be used to kill prey.  Finally we
see the utter aggressiveness when a confrontation with another troop and their
newly found tool is their weapon of choice. Is that the moment that civilization
is born?  That our ancestors (questionable) became carnivorous?

I have to remind again that ThomasG is always making reference to clubs and
aggressively bashing heads, and since it occurred to the simian in Space
Oddessy to use the femur as a weapon, TG provides us with a comparison
there!

There can be much more to discuss about this entire topic but that is enough
for now.

It doesn’t really matter, does it, Anarcissie whether or not critical thinking or
intellection, which is a precondition for critical thinking, affects political
attitudes in most people, but certainly education whether formal or through life
experience or discussion with others, does.  Unless they, most people, are
completely without a holographic brain.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 30, 2009 at 10:05 pm Link to this comment

No ThomasG you are the black hole to suck away whatever enlightenment that could happen—-the anti-intellectual sponge of inanity. I wish I were paid for this but alas no. Just myself venturing out into the net. Why would anyone pay me for this? I wouldn’t!

Palin now knows she has been identified as “Evita” and dismissed it. Just another “attack” on her.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 30, 2009 at 7:45 pm Link to this comment

BR549, December 30 at 10:51 pm,

Perhaps you will rub off and enlighten our monkey contingent here on Truthdig.  I don’t think they are really as dumb as they act.

For the most part I think the monkey contingent here on Truthdig are paid to use fulminating and equivocating sophistry and propaganda to foment and lead the populace against their best interest and that it is expedient to their purpose that they feign a lack of understanding in order to lead those who are like the monkeys against their best interest.

I think that it is more probable that Shenonymous, Night-Gaunt, and OzarkMichael are anti-obelisk, that are looking to spark devolution, rather than evolution.

Report this
Anarcissie's avatar

By Anarcissie, December 30, 2009 at 7:19 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 29 at 3:13 pm:
‘It is the argument, then, of nature vs nurture Anarcissie and it looks like you
think political perspectives are imprinted on the genes.  That is about as preposterous a theory as I’ve heard. ...’

Actually, I thought that was at least implicit in the Psychology Today article.  Certainly genes account for much of personality, and personality, according to the article, accounts for much of political choice.

However, my theory was not that genes alone account for political choice, but also early childhood and sometimes even later experiences, the important quality being that they are experienced strongly and non-rationally.  No doubt many other non-rational and semi-rational feelings, beliefs and perceptions also affect political attitudes and choices, especially social pressure, so the situation is not simply one of parents passing on liberal or conservative genes and socialization.

I think critical thinking, intellection, education and so on are pretty far down on the list of things that affect political attitudes in most people.

Report this
BR549's avatar

By BR549, December 30, 2009 at 6:51 pm Link to this comment

I think the beauty of this whole conversation about 2001 and the obelisk is
that, like ThomasG seemed to indicate, the obelisk was what initiated or
sparked our evolutionary process. I’ll leave out, for the moment, that the
obelisk seemed only interested in the evolution of man and didn’t seem to give
a rat’s pitooty about the evolution of the dinosaurs or a flowering hibiscus.

Correct me if I’m wrong, since I haven’t seen the flick in many years, but wasn’t
there a scene around the time of the bone smashing, where one of the apes
was aware of the obelisk? Not sure, but I thought so. As evolving primates
realized “it’s” potential, it took us another step outward, and another, leading
us eventually to question larger and larger pieces of the universal pie.

As for the banter, we should remember that some part of each of us keeps
bringing us back to this one thread about Sarah to keep fueling this discussion.
So, in a sense, not only is Truthdig an obelisk, but so is this particular thread,
and so is everyone of us who seemingly challenges our belief system.

The obelisk was a form of Big Bang that nudged primate development out of its
Steady State complacency; not unlike what some of us are doing here to others,
challenging some recalcitrant parts of our ego. At least we are here discussing
it, instead of being inanely glued to the tube watching Survivor or Glenn Beck.
That’s worth a drink or two, right there. I’ll get the first round. Everyone’s
invited   :o)

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 30, 2009 at 4:34 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 30 at 8:19 pm,

If you do not want to converse any more, enjoy the sunrise and the dawn of your new day.

Have a good evening.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 30, 2009 at 4:27 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 30 at 6:25 pm,

If you listen closely to the humming of the obelisk, it is putting the thought into your mind that you are involved in an ABSTRACT, FIGURATIVE, and DYNAMIC conversation, and you will have to evolve past your LITERAL, EMOTIONAL, and STATIC chatter as a monkey at the water hole to appropriately respond conversationally.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 30, 2009 at 4:19 pm Link to this comment

You are being defensive, ThomasG.

It takes a monkey to know a monkey.  Nannanananaaaaa….  See how childishly
monkeylike we can be?  From imbecile to savant!  You’ve no where else to go with
this.

It has become boring.  So unless this forum elevates a notch in interest, bye bye.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 30, 2009 at 4:14 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, December 30 at 6:16 pm,

Keep telling yourself how superior you are, if it soothes your tattered ego there at the water hole, because you are not going to hear it from anyone else that isn’t a part of your chorus, and you know it; the same can be said for Shenonymous and OzarkMichael and all of the rest of you monkeys lurking around at the water hole waiting to evolve from your superior position of monkeys at the water hole.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 30, 2009 at 4:04 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 30 at 6:25 pm,

Are you taking drugs? ———— Or, what?

You’re still identifying with the monkeys, I see, and still subjectifying the objective and chattering at the water hole.

It will be a long, long time before the obelisk initiating your evolution can depart to the moon.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 30, 2009 at 2:25 pm Link to this comment

Wait, wait, ThomasG, wait until I scratch my head!  You attempt to force me to
be one of your relatives.  Aw, it just isn’t possible.  Typical of your impotent
strategy.  Cross breeding between a higher being such as myself is not yet
possible with a lower animal who thinks it is a god.  But keep trying.  It is my
job as a teacher to encourage the ignorant to do better.  Problem is you cannot
make the aggression.  Sigh.  You really are substandard in your attempt to
verbally spar. 

With the comedy show set aside for the moment…and to answer you more
directly….We would have to subjectively hypothesize what chattering of
monkeys might mean to the obelisk.  Nothing.  It could only make note that
your brethren was excited at the curiosity that showed up in their camp.  A
normal reaction.  The obelisk was not shown to be able to engage in an
interchange of aural activity. It merely notice, mysteriously, features of its
environment ant its contents then transmitted the data to whatever (you may
subjectively make up whatever that whatever is if you like).  When dug up on
the moon, it emitted sounds but no demonstration it absorbed or exchanged
with sounds external to it.  It had as much interaction with the astronauts as it
did with the monkeys.  None.  Then it skedaddled outta there on to its next
assignment.  We could hypothesize it was pontificating it vibrating sounds just
as you do and therefore I would have to concede there might be a connection. 

Fool:  You are feebly making up a denigrating story and calling me names to try
to reduce me to your groveling level specifically to suit your inflated feeling of
superiority because you cannot deal with my questions.  I am calmly
responding to you.  Notice I do not use any bold lettering!  I do have a grand
command of my language however.  And I do admit to an exclamation point or
two now and then.  You are the one that has a perverted attachment to clubs. 
Laugh laugh.  You try to swing them at me every chance you get.  You nasty old
man, with a violent nature.  Where does your penchant for violence come from? 
It was noticed of your psychic twin martha also.  It is a family trait?  I thank my
genes for giving me the ability to duck so well.  I may be at the dawn of my
evolution, but you have not even smelled it yet.  It is good, though, you have
suspicions, you might have a chance.  It is your history of chattering, and as
proof I only point to your unending repetitive posts.  Chatter chatter, ThomasG. 
Ch ch ch ch chatter.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 30, 2009 at 2:16 pm Link to this comment

ThomasG that isn’t Shenonymous that is you who has that bone club and ready to smash in the skull of any you dislike. You writings show that! Projection is a common trait of avoiding complicity. It is Shenonymous and myself and many others who are fine at the water hole and get along well enough even with our differences. (Some of which are considerable!)

The obelisk is the monitor and maybe a catalyst but the chattering of simians (monkeys have tails) is important to them. They represent the oldest direct ancestor to us like “Lucy” who is also related to chimpanzees [Pan troglyditus] but I disagree with the idea that violence and aggression gave us the umph necessary to go beyond being animals of the field. I don’t know if that was Clarke or the screen writers who did that. [I need to read the story.] But only the scientists will tell us from what they find and research that illuminates more of the past for us.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 30, 2009 at 1:40 pm Link to this comment

Shenonymous, December 30 at 3:58 pm,

There you go again.  You did not answer the question, “What does the chattering of monkeys mean to the obelisk?”

I know that you are emotionally involved in defending your ego.  However, your chattering like a monkey means nothing to me other than that you as an emotional chattering monkey have staked out your territory at the water hole, picked up your club to defend your territory and are, to the best of your ability, trying to enforce your domination over your territory at the waterhole; you are now at the dawn of your evolution; enjoy the sunrise.

Report this
ThomasG's avatar

By ThomasG, December 30, 2009 at 1:32 pm Link to this comment

Night-Gaunt, December 30 at 3:56 pm,

My conception of the obelisk was that it was an abstract figurative metaphor that was representative of the inception of the evolutionary process and that the obelisk receded from man as man evolved in order to lead man to further evolve.

Report this
Shenonymous's avatar

By Shenonymous, December 30, 2009 at 11:58 am Link to this comment

Sure, ThomasG, it is always about me when your post is directed at me!  You
are really stupid.  Always shoot the offensive bullet when a defense is really
weak.  Always shoot the messenger when you are ineffective to speak against
the message.  And we then saw the monkeys traipse of into outer space, right? 
Uh, at what point did humans, including yourself, evolve from monkeys
according to your theory?  Your understanding of human evolution is pathetic. 
Are you so dense to think you can motivate the masses with your style of
motivation?  Get a grip, ThomasG.  You live in the fictional world of Clarke’s
world.  Cute as Clarke was, there are other more factual, realistic models.

The What Is Needed Theory of fixing the world is about as stupid an approach
as there is.  You have uttered this phrase a number of time as have a few others
and it is always made from an overblown conceit that you know best.  Didn’t
you say you knew nothing, a la Socrates?  What a blowhard.  If you really knew
what was needed, I dare say you would be in a position of power.  If you
stopped pretending for a minute you might figure a way to actually motivate
the lemming masses.

Report this
Night-Gaunt's avatar

By Night-Gaunt, December 30, 2009 at 11:56 am Link to this comment

Actually as I understand it the Obelisk (probe) was a watcher but most importantly a catalyst to growth of behavior. Too bad that violent aggression seems to be tied to the pursuit of “out there” and discovery and moving beyond the status quo. I haven’t read the original novel but I did read “3001:The Final Odyssey” which was quite fascinating. Curiosity is important too for without it there would be no need to explore not just to move on to find a place to live as the resources are used up. How is that ThomasG?

Too bad one of the figurehead icons of the Conservative (Regressive) Party is the opposite. Plastic and fake and superficial. Ideal for these wretched times. You bet’cha!

Report this

Page 3 of 5 pages  <  1 2 3 4 5 >

 
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Publisher, Zuade Kaufman   Editor, Robert Scheer
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook