|
|
Post by kmc on Sept 7, 2006 6:19:17 GMT -5
Blow low, 0-strat. Blow low.  Thanks for fixing it. |
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Sept 7, 2006 6:22:57 GMT -5
And yeah, that sounded like a total sexual come on...and I meant it. I love you, strat.
|
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Sept 7, 2006 8:04:08 GMT -5
I'll just leave you two alone now.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Sept 7, 2006 8:10:23 GMT -5
Don't forget to close the door on your way out ...
Those two are notorious for making lots of noise on occasion !!
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Sept 7, 2006 10:19:20 GMT -5
But on Mary's question, what we do as Americans is vote and protest, run for office, or quit the ordeal altogether. The fact is, George Bush is the twice (dubiously) elected President of the US. Plenty of people were apparently ok with him to give him the highest office in the land. He is a problem and a symptom of the problem at the same time.
The question becomes, to what extent do you care about your principled objections to the CEO President? Do you care enough to vote, violently protest? Or are you at the point where I am, where anything short of impeachment seems like a slap in the wrist?
|
|
|
|
Post by strat-0 on Sept 7, 2006 10:30:42 GMT -5
Love the current banner ads:
Vintage Strat-0-Matic
Stratocaster Legend DVD
Strat Flat Iron
Colon Cleaners Reviewed....?
OK, who's the wise guy?
|
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Sept 7, 2006 10:32:04 GMT -5
I've been following the outrage over Mohammad Khatami (the former Iranian president, prior to Ahmadinejad) with some interest - many conservatives think that this man should have been denied a Visa into the United States, and that we are providing a platform for one of America's "enemies" to spew propaganda.
Never mind the dazzling hypocrisy given the sort of international thugs who are routinely given the red carpet treatment at the White House (not just this White House, that is, but every White House) but really, are we to completely shut ourselves off to all communication now and forever with anyone who has ever been associated with an "axis of evil" country? Are saber-rattling and pre-emptive strikes now the only possible means of engaging recalcitrant "fanatic" countries? Sure, by Western standards, Khatami's political reign was objectionable - but, by Iranian standards, he was a relative reformer. While the conservative media is having a great laugh at the expense of his "reformer" status, they don't seem to comprehend the relatively impotent status of Iranian presidents, given the sovereignty of the Supreme Leader and the ayatollahs. How much do they really expect Khatami to have accomplished, given he occupied a largey symbolic position in the government?
I'm not saying Khatami should be welcomed as a great friend or a political hero or anything to that effect - but that it is an opportunity for a dialog between representatives of two countries presently bitterly opposed to one another and possibly sliding inexorably toward war - this is not a terrible thing. Most preposterous of all is the endless crowing and complaining about Harvard inviting Khatami to speak at the JFK School of Government. Come on, people - this is what educational institutions do - they're not only supposed to invite unambiguously wonderful people to speak there. Given the prominence of Iran in world affairs today, it should come as no surprise, and certainly no blight, that Harvard's School of Government would view Khatami's visit as an intellectual opportunity - one would hope many of the questions from the audience will be tough and critical. Just because the man is invited to speak doesn't mean he'll be treated with kid gloves.
M
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Sept 7, 2006 10:39:19 GMT -5
Does anyone think it's time to stop considering Bush as just a simpleton or idiot, and begin regarding him as possibly the most dangerous man alive on the planet?
*shrugs* But what are we gonna do about it . . . ? It's like someone let a suicide-bomber drive the bus. About all you could do in such a situation, is wait until the bus slows down enough to make a jump out a window, and hope for the best . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by Mary on Sept 7, 2006 10:39:35 GMT -5
But on Mary's question, what we do as Americans is vote and protest, run for office, or quit the ordeal altogether. The fact is, George Bush is the twice (dubiously) elected President of the US. Plenty of people were apparently ok with him to give him the highest office in the land. He is a problem and a symptom of the problem at the same time. The question becomes, to what extent do you care about your principled objections to the CEO President? Do you care enough to vote, violently protest? Or are you at the point where I am, where anything short of impeachment seems like a slap in the wrist? Oh, I care enough to do al these things - short of violent protest - but I have lost all faith that any of these things have the slightest impact. So what's the point, then? |
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Sept 7, 2006 10:42:05 GMT -5
I'm in agreement w/Mary when she says "I have lost all faith that any of these things have the slightest impact." Therefore, I can only suggest that we "regroup"/huddle, and re-think our options for alternative strategies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Sept 7, 2006 10:48:06 GMT -5
1. "Fight Fire With Fire"
By this, I certainly don't mean what the Administration considers is "fighting fire w/fire" (i.e, the War in Iraq) -- that's obviously bullshit, and only succeeds in guaranteeing the perpetuation of the cycle of violence.
What I mean by the term, is utilizing the Law to try and find this Administration Guilty of breaking it.
I realize that a lot of Supreme Court Justices have been replaced/appointed/cherry-picked by this Administration, so that is a stumbling block.
I figure, we can either
~Represent ourselves (rather than have a corrupt lawyer foil us)
or
~Insure a proper lawyer who is earnestly on our side represents us. I am not so cynical/despondent to think that ALL lawyers are corrupt; therefore, surely there is a pool of well-intentioned lawyers who might represent such a case.
I say: We the People form a Case Vs. The Bush Administration as well as one that directly connects, and implicates, dozens of long-gone, past politicians traced right back to the L.B. Johnson Administration -- threading through George Herbert Walker Bush and all the rest of them -- and succeed in a Citizen's Arrest of the entire backlot of these short-sighted, greedy capitalist scoundrels.
Just a thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by Thorngrub on Sept 7, 2006 10:57:08 GMT -5
Surely, if a murderer who committed a crime 40 odd years ago can be found guilty today of that crime through forensic evidence newly unearthed, then similarly we the people can pull the strings that uproot the almost-cleverly concealed evidence which would condemn several generations of corrupt politicians vying for a monopoly of power & wealth whose direct and indirect consequences have been the loss of untold thousands of human lives.
We need a new breed of discriminating thinkers who can weed out this very real thread of crimes against humanity, and hold all affiliated parties accountable for it, regardless of whether they're currently enjoying the twilight years of their retirment, or indeed, whether they are already dead & buried.
I demand that those dead & buried who are currently lauded in the history books, yet who covertly may be responsible for hideous crimes against humanity, be exposed for it. Then we can revise our history books, and teach future generations of our children what criminals they actually were.
Re: Lyndon B. Johnson, George Herbert Walker Bush, George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, and more than likely over one hundred others going back in time and all connected together right up until the current date.
And still they are getting away with it.
Ultimately: There is no one to blame but our own timid selves .. . for allowing it.
If we the people do not take advantage of our own system with which we might make such a collective citizen's arrest. . . then we deserve to be taken advantage of, I say.
|
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Sept 7, 2006 11:04:36 GMT -5
But on Mary's question, what we do as Americans is vote and protest, run for office, or quit the ordeal altogether. The fact is, George Bush is the twice (dubiously) elected President of the US. Plenty of people were apparently ok with him to give him the highest office in the land. He is a problem and a symptom of the problem at the same time. The question becomes, to what extent do you care about your principled objections to the CEO President? Do you care enough to vote, violently protest? Or are you at the point where I am, where anything short of impeachment seems like a slap in the wrist? Oh, I care enough to do al these things - short of violent protest - but I have lost all faith that any of these things have the slightest impact. So what's the point, then? I guess the only thing to do is laugh about it, then. It's what Vonnegut does. It's what I try to do. |
|
|
|
Post by kmc on Sept 7, 2006 11:08:22 GMT -5
Here, for example, is something to laugh at: "There are some people, and I'm one of them, that believe George Bush was placed where he is by the Lord," Tomanio said. "I don't care how he governs, I will support him. I'm a Republican through and through." - some teacher, explaining why she will vote Republican despite the American clusterfuck. www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/07/southern.women.ap/index.html |
|
|
|
Post by rockysigman on Sept 7, 2006 11:09:33 GMT -5
I agree with Kenny. Nothing short of impeachment is warranted. But the only way that we can help that along is to instill some people into office this fall who will actually do that...and I doubt very many of the candidates on the ballot are willing to do that, nor will all the ones willing to vote for impeachment be elected. At this point I really don't think there's much we can do.
|
|
