T-Mac

Monday 26th July 2010 | 01:22 AM

Friendo-

She is hot and that has as much to do with her qualifications as BHO's ethnicity. (thanks for referring to me as a close friend)

I would be a maybe in that poll as I would cast a vote for the candidate most aligned with my views that is the most electable.

That's just politics the most qualified doesn't always make the ticket. (anyone would have to admit Hillary's resume was more signifigant than BHO's).

In America the biggest threat to indivual americans comes from strategies to improve our lot from politicians collectively. On the right this manifests itself from corporatism and religous influence on the left from Union and minority influence.

However these lines are blurring as the party in power is increasingly willing to embrace the others traditional circles of influence. On the left we see this by policians reaching out to religous leaders to embrace their brand of imigration policy and certain denominations embracing collective salvation for one group or another. On the right we see George Bush abandoning traditional conservative values regarding imigration and the bailout fund.

What can lead us out of these times is a return to an emphasis of indidual liberty and responsibility and a willingness as a society to be individually responsible for our own lot in life.

We all start at different places and finish with different results but we all have the right to run the race at our own pace in our own way.

T-Mac

Monday 26th July 2010 | 01:25 AM

great topic

Friendo

Monday 26th July 2010 | 01:31 AM

...in response to this comment by T-Mac. Well said my friend, well said. You are a welcome addition here at RL, I hope you find enjoyment being part of our circle, and I look forward to your input and comments into the future. Many have come and gone over my past two years of writing. some have stayed, some have come and gone. I hope you stay.

There is a possibility that another from the area may start writing, and I am very excited about this.

Thanks for commenting as always. Notice that I gave you another Kudo.

Pax,
f~

T-Mac

Monday 26th July 2010 | 01:55 AM

I look forward to it

I'm hoping to learn that individually we collectively aren't as far apart as those in power would like us to believe and from there build a strategy to defeat those in power who don't have the indivdual's best interests at heart.

If not then I can always keep working and praying to make a positive influence.

on another note... JFC is ethically equivalent to the N word... although neither particularily enrage me it is interesting to note that those who are often described as the N word often use it.

Freud might find an interesting insight into you from this.

T-Mac

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 11:46 AM

Friendo

I thought only right wingers like me were conspiracy whacks

how can you possibly deny Muslim extremists attacked on 911

hell I'm ready to bring our boys home and could probably agree we made some mistakes in our pursuit of these two wars so far

but how can you deny who attacked on 911?

Come on Buddy explain this.

Friendo

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 12:17 PM

...in response to this comment by T-Mac. I'll tell you what I think T-Man...I think it was a total inside job. That jerk Cheney and his buddies set up the whole thing. Call me a wack if you like, but it's nothing but crap. The towers were dropped with explosives, along with building seven. Don't forget about the B.S. story about the 727 slamming into to the Pentagon. How quickly we forget all the discrepancies. How easily we are distracted by the next revelation. How rapidly our heads are turned to the next roadside attraction. Hey...did you see Jack Bauer last night? And wasn't that episode of The apprentice just great?

Ya know, I used to think Bill Maher was cool, until he started telling everyone how un-cool it was to believe in a conspiracy. Well, they've got us believing in a conspiracy alright, its just that the Muslim conspiracy they've got us believing in doesn't have nearly the force of the one that brought down the towers.

So now you think I'm the wack...Good, it takes all kinds. At least I'm not trying to solve it all by sedating myself with the television, like most Americans who have a better life because they shop at wal mart. God, I could spit.

f~

T-Mac

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 07:42 PM

...in response to this comment by Friendo. Freindo-

I gotta say I didn't think I'd ever meet someone who actually believed that stuff, you and Van got it goin on.

Seriously, examine your personal motivations for believing this stuff.

Like those consumed by UFO lore sometimes people embrace conspiracy theories as an escape mechanism. Not sayin that's you, don't expect you to admit it but examine yourself.

You have been given the ability to know whtas right and wrong. use it.

Most fanciful conspiracy theories are built around some sort of factual detail but sometimes the obvious is exactly what it seems.

History has proven that misguided religous fanatics are capable of the most evil acts in the name of whatever.

Just because we make mistakes and you don't agree with our way of life doesn't mean islamic terrorists didn't do this.

T-Mac

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 07:44 PM

Friendo-

I gave you Kudos for recognizing Bill Maher is an idiot. (occaissionally entertaining idiot, idiot non the less)

Friendo

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 07:49 PM

...in response to this comment by T-Mac. Please tell me whats OBVIOUS about the terrorist attack on Building seven. Show me whats OBVIOUS about a passenger liner crashing into the Pentagon.

f~

Friendo

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 08:17 PM

...in response to this comment by Friendo. I'm almost afraid to ask, but who's Van?

f~

Gina

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 09:48 PM

...in response to this comment by Friendo. "Most fanciful conspiracy theories are built around some sort of factual detail but sometimes the obvious is exactly what it seems. "

T-Mac, Please answer Friendo's questions--What's obvious about the "attack" on Building 7 and the "airliner" slamming into the Pentagon and the one that supposedly crashed in the field in PA? If you can't, then you need to be quiet and move on to another subject.

T-Mac writes: "History has proven that misguided religous fanatics are capable of the most evil acts in the name of whatever."

Our government is definitely not motivated by anything like m-o-n-e-y, or underhanded at all. Pffft~

T-Mac Writes: "Just because we make mistakes and you don't agree with our way of life doesn't mean islamic terrorists didn't do this. "

What "way" of "life" do you mean? And it doesn't mean Islamic terrorists DID do it. It's not as if our own government has never flown any aircraft REMOTEly. No offense, T-Mac, but GROW UP!

Gina

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 09:56 PM

Yep, people are always motivated by a fear of losing something -- even if they NEVER POSSESSED IT IN THE FIRST PLACE OR EVEN KNOW WHAT IT IS THEY'RE AFRAID OF LOSING!

Likewise, they're also motivated by the thought that something might be gained -- even if they have to murder another to gain it. Some people would do anything to simply be called a "hero" or the "BEST" whether true or not, they don't care-- "I'm the BEST! Look! No Hands!"

Gina

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 10:06 PM

I was actually going to recommend a show I saw recently that I was absolutely thrilled with called "Lie to Me," until they started with the "Al Queda" and "Islamic Terrorists," (to say nothing of the episode they devoted to "homophobia.") Not that I believe gays should be mistreated or killed, or that Islamic terrorists don't exist, but if you want to get someone to change their minds about an issue, give them a show they'll love and when their favorite actor(s) spits out the lines, they'll swallow any amount of garbage hook, line, and sinker.

Tony Fyler

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 10:07 PM

Alright, this is getting a bit silly now.
I love a good thriller as much as anyone (Christopher Nolan diatribe notwithstanding), and I especially loved Hugh Laurie's novel The Gun Seller, where an international act of terrorism is used as a cover by a weapons consortium to 'advertise' the need for its new retaliatory vehicles. I'm quite willing to believe there are powerful people who, in a world of too much peace, would 'need' to destabilise that and would be capable of playing both sides, to engender an 'endless' war on 'terror'. And it's true that one of the prime contender companies for such a role would be Halliburton, who pretty much owned senior figures in the Bush administration. Quite willing to concede all of that in principle.

But the training of those who were onboard some of the 9/11 planes took place, or at least began, before the Bush era - this was taking place in the time of the Clinton administration. What are we inferring here - that the Bush administration just happened to trip over a bunch of elements of this conspiracy, and successfully put them together, killing their own citizens in an effort to get their mad agenda through? Not, in all probability, above their imagination. Certainly, I'd suggest, above their capabilities.

Gina

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 10:15 PM

...in response to this comment by Tony Fyler. "But the training of those who were onboard some of the 9/11 planes took place, or at least began, before the Bush era - this was taking place in the time of the Clinton administration. What are we inferring here - that the Bush administration just happened to trip over a bunch of elements of this conspiracy, and successfully put them together, killing their own citizens in an effort to get their mad agenda through? Not, in all probability, above their imagination. Certainly, I'd suggest, above their capabilities."

Tony, love ya, man, but you make great assumptions. First you assume there was someone on board a "plane" (What planes, Tony? I thought they were "Jets") who'd been "trained" -- because that's something you've had drilled into your ears over and over and over again.

You also assume that there is a change in administrations simply because we have an "election" and the faces change. Again, because that is something you've had drilled into your brain by mental imagery, over and over and over again.

It's like Jon Stewart of the Daily Show says (who also likes to harp on "homophobics"):

"It's 'true' because.... it's said a LOT."

Tony Fyler

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 10:37 PM

...in response to this comment by Gina. lol Gina. C'mon now, get a grip girl ;o). Jets are just a form of plane, that's all. The word 'Jet' refers to the form of engine, it doesn't make it any less a plane. All it means is that it's not powered by, for instance a propeller ;o).

And 'trained' is not an issue of being drilled into my ears over and over again. I've recently had to write some stuff about this, and so I did some independent research. While it's certainly true that there are facts missing, but that certain people were onboard the plane, and that you can follow their timeline back, is not one of them.

And ah yes, the old chestnut. As Bill Hicks was fond of saying, the 'great totalitarian government that rules this planet...' I have a question for people who ACTUALLY believe this is the case. If it's true that nothing changes when we vote, and that there's some shady uber-government running the planet, and that's what you think is really going on, why haven't you, yourselves, done anything about it yet? Again I say, it's great for thrillers and comedies, but if you actually believe that's what's happening, don't hide behind patchy conspiracy theories and world-weary condescension, come out and fight them - if you can pinpoint exactly who it is you think is involved in it, rather than some (by necessity) shadowy 'Them.'

I'm going to regret asking this...I just know I am...but while we're on the subject of conspiracy theories...is there anyone here who doesn't think we landed on the Moon?

Gina

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 10:50 PM

...in response to this comment by Tony Fyler. Oh, Tony, I'm so sorry. I didn't mean to ruffle your poor little feathers. It'll be okay. There-there. And, no, I don't know whether or not we landed on the moon, and even if we did -- tell me, what good came from it?

Gina

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 11:03 PM

And, what's the name of that place where the presidents and higher government officials and actors go to in California around San Fran? It's a very secretive society and membership costs like $25,000 . Its name starts with a "B" - the Bohemian Grove! Richard Nixon went there and said it was the "faggiest G-D thing" he ever saw. Bill Clinton swears he's never been there. Ha! He also swore he never "had sex with that woman."

Tony Fyler

Tuesday 27th July 2010 | 11:30 PM

...in response to this comment by Gina. lol no feathers, Gina...that'd be on an entirely different evolutionary twig ;o) Just think it's amazing how easily people fall for a good story that makes them somehow victims of other people, that's all, irrespective of the facts.

What good came of landing on the Moon? You mean apart from all the scientific knowledge and discovery that came from the process of striving to get there, keep people alive through a journey there and back etc? I think the overriding good it did was an expansion of what it means to be human. Until that moment, we had only ever stood on one sphere, and the whole of our experience was Earthbound and small, no matter how wonderful it was (and some of it of course genuinely was). But in doing that, in going further than we'd ever gone, I would say the benefit was that we evolved our own understanding of ourselves - we became beings of limitless potential. Certainly there remain to this day limits on what we can realistically achieve, but even the most currently preposterous ideas, like reaching across the universe, become questions of solving problems, rather than questions of our impossible smallness.

Gina

Wednesday 28th July 2010 | 09:56 AM

...in response to this comment by Tony Fyler. I realized later today after thinking it over that your moon question was a red herring. We haven't even figured out everything about our own planet and we need to fly a gazillion miles to the moon to learn things? Please.

But I do think it's interesting that you believe that people should fight those in control as if we haven't learned that that will solve nothing. There are more peaceful ways of solving issues, but a peaceful way many know not.

I also think it's amazing that here we have all this amazing technology (enough that we can put a man on the moon) but they can't find Osama Bin Laden, but al-Qaeda has more. They have all this technology that can pull something down like two sky scrapers and no one's the wiser. Oh, but we know within days exactly who did it. It's bologna. It's funny how the U.S. can say without flinching who did these things and we're supposed to believe them -- still, after we were told unflinchingly that there were WMD's in Iraq. There are more holes in their story than Swiss cheese. Why did they confiscate the cameras all around the Pentagon after the "attack"?

Don't answer that, Tony. It's a rhetorical question. I'd rather not argue. The truth will come out one day.

T-Mac

Wednesday 28th July 2010 | 11:26 AM

Wish I could continue to debate you all on these intrguing points

however I think I'll go argue with my six year old about what is cooler a lab puppy or a corvette

it's a more reasonable conversation

Friendo

Wednesday 28th July 2010 | 11:35 AM

...in response to this comment by T-Mac. The Corvette is much cooler...Do you know somebody who wants to buy one?

f~