Originally Posted by princeofcats67

I really wish the election was over and done with so maybe people might get back to discussing the Generational Theory more. All in due time, I guess.

Take care,

Prince

Trouble is, as our president said last night to David, the election now goes on all the time.

Here's the interview:

http://youtu.be/nmi2bshAbkQ

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Weak. You make claims, pretend they are somehow self-evident or axiomatic, and then insist that the burden is on other people to disprove them. That's not the way it works, buddy.

See those funny clothes he's wearing in that picture? Those mark him as a mercenary -- a killer-for-hire. I'm not sure about you, but I'm sure as hell not one of those. Nor are the people I associate with (I try very hard to stick with only decent folks). So that guy is as much "we" with me as the guy in black here is:


I've got sons, too, you see. Oh, and by the way, your guys in those costumes are pointing guns at him. So I can kind of imagine a little bit where he's coming from. But that's neither here nor there... in any case, he's not "us", and the killers-for-hire aren't "us", either.

See, there's another of those wholly-unsupported, and factually untenable claims of yours. Those guys aren't fighting for their country overseas, unless you think that 'their country' wholly consists of the rulers of the empire that seats itself in their country.
And in any case, the more sympathetic person is the one who fights to defend his own country in his own country, from people who are in his country against his will. I realize that's not terribly germane to the unsupported claim you're making, but it seemed worth saying nonetheless.

---

Oh yeah, and you can't let it go without again making your unsupported, untenable claim that those people are "protecting [my] life". You leave claim unsupported, of course, because it is simply flat-out false.

There is not one national political leader in this country, regardless of party, that supports your view. Not one.

Even Ron Paul or Bernie Sanders, who have been most vocal in not only extracting ourselves from Afghanistan but most of our foreign bases, would NEVER say or believe what you have said about our troops being mercenaries, not being one of us.

You are the alien here.

Why do you want to continue living in a country where not one single national policy maker shares your view? Why would you come back here after the big bad world took your lunch money?

Why not go live in a different place that shares your views? Why not go live in the outskirts of Mogadishu that comes about as close to your Libertarian or Anarchist magic pony land as its going to get on this globe?

Why? I’ll tell you why. It’s because you are a cowardly hypocrite who in the anonymity of the Internet gets off on shiting on those than afford you the right to be the cowardly hypocrite that you are.

God help your sons become men some day in spite of their very poor excuse of one in their father.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

But I love cats too, so I want to steal your slogan. Now, I know, taxes are theft and all, so I feel it is "just" and "fair" for me to steal your slogan too.

Stealing is such a loaded term. How about you borrow it? Better yet, you can have it. Any cat-lover is a friend of mine.

Originally Posted by Eric

Yes indeed; listening to the rhetoric imposed upon us by one side, being stuck in a loop for 32 years, means the replies to it are also stuck in a loop; they have to be; some folks just don't get it! So on and on we go; but for how long? Not past this 4T, I would imagine.

Understandable, from your POV.

Originally Posted by Eric

Wake up from your nap, Cat!

I can assure you that I am anything but sleeping. But now that I think about it, why should I not be napping? It appears to me that you are set in your beliefs(which is fine by me). I have some beliefs as well. In fact, I'd bet I could accomplish some of your goals, but do so in a manner that is less problematic i/r/t my beliefs(that are usually process-oriented). I think it's best for us to not discuss politics, Eric. Let's just be friends and be there for one another in case either of us requires a little boost, OK?

Originally Posted by Eric

EDIT: Hey! I think my words above were so clear, inspiring and apt, that I will hit the replay button! They are as cool as Good Time by Owl City and Pray by JB; worth listening to over and over! So Prince, "broken record" is passe, man; stuck on replay is the 21st century version! Wake up and get hip!

Yes. Stuck. Got it.
[Note: I did actually change my siggy in part because of JB's song: Pray. I thought you might want to know that, FWIW.]

Originally Posted by Eric

It will be time soon, when the 4T will dispense with trickle-down theories and scapegoating of "those who don't take responsibility" who should not get "the tax money I earned" etc etc., and then you and everyone will realize that we are all in society together and everyone needs to do their part. We are not just individuals; when one person suffers, that could be you or me next time. And help cannot be done with charity alone and only some willing souls participating while others get off scot free from doing their part. That is fair and just.

Yes, Master.

Prince

Originally Posted by playwrite

Why? I’ll tell you why. It’s because you are a cowardly worm who in the anonymity of the Internet gets off on shiting on those than afford you the right to be the cowardly worm that you are.

No, it's because you magically don't hear what people are saying if they diverge from you by as much as 5 degrees.

Even Ron Paul or Bernie Sanders, who have been most vocal in not only extracting ourselves from Afghanistan but most of our foreign bases, would NEVER say or believe what you have said about our troops being mercenaries, not being one of us.

Oh, every politician denies our use of mercenaries? Amazing.

In October 2007, the United Nations released a two-year study that stated, that although hired as "security guards", private contractors were performing military duties. Many countries, including the United States and the United Kingdom, are not signatories to the 1989 United Nations Mercenary Convention banning the use of mercenaries.

Do you think our real, uniformed soldiers appreciate the fact that mercenaries tend to make more money, and have more legal protection against the Uniform Code of Military Justice?

• Employees of private military company CACI and Titan Corp. were involved in the Iraq Abu Ghraib prison scandal in 2003, and 2004. The U.S. Army "found that contractors were involved in 36 percent of the [Abu Ghraib] proven incidents and identified 6 employees as individually culpable",^[22] although none have faced prosecution unlike US military personnel.^[22]
• On March 31, 2004, four American private contractors belonging to the company Blackwater USA were killed by insurgents inFallujah as they drove through the town. They were dragged from their car in one of the most violent attacks on U.S. contractors in the conflict. Following the attack, an angry mob mutilated and burned the bodies, dragging them through the streets before they were hung on a bridge. (See also: 31 March 2004 Fallujah ambush, Operation Vigilant Resolve)
• On March 28, 2005, 16 American contractors and three Iraqi aides from Zapata Engineering, under contract to the US Army Corps of Engineers to manage an ammunition storage depot, were detained following two incidents in which they allegedly fired upon U.S. Marine checkpoint. While later released, the contractors have levied complaints of mistreatment against the Marines who detained them.
• On June 5, 2005, Colonel Theodore S. Westhusing committed suicide, after writing a report exonerating US Investigations Services of allegations of fraud, waste and abuse he received in an anonymous letter in May.
• On October 27, 2005, a "trophy" video, complete with post-production Elvis Presley music, appearing to show private military contractors in Baghdad shooting Iraqi civilians sparked two investigations after it was posted on the Internet.^[23][24][25] The video has been linked unofficially to Aegis Defence Services. According to the posters, the man who is seen shooting vehicles on this video in Iraq was a South African employee of Aegis Victory team named Danny Heydenreycher. He served in the British military for six years. After the incident the regional director for Victory ROC tried to fire Heydenreycher, but the team threatened to resign if he did. As of December 2005, Aegis is conducting a formal inquiry into the issue, although some concerns on its impartiality have been raised.

Why don't you hop down here real quick, and we can go to any bar you like near Blount Island to ask the local enlisted folks how they feel about the use of hired guns.

One should also not always interpret what Justin says literally. When he said "mercenaries" or language to that equivalent, I took him to mean soldiers in the regular U.S. military, who these days serve for pay, as a career, and are not like the citizen-soldiers of past wars.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Stealing is such a loaded term. How about you borrow it? Better yet, you can have it. Any cat-lover is a friend of mine.

Thanks; I guess you read my essay on my kitty. Just borrowing your term, I'm sure! Consider it a compliment.

I can assure you that I am anything but sleeping. But now that I think about it, why should I not be napping? It appears to me that you are set in your beliefs(which is fine by me). I have some beliefs as well. In fact, I'd bet I could accomplish some of your goals, but do so in a manner that is less problematic i/r/t my beliefs(that are usually process-oriented). I think it's best for us to not discuss politics, Eric. Let's just be friends and be there for one another in case either of us requires a little boost, OK?

Sure, we're friends; we just agree on some things and maybe not on others. You can discuss whatever you wish, and you will or not, of course. In regards to me, though, there's just no reason to go backwards in my beliefs; there is always more to learn about society and politics, as in philosophy and science; I am just unlikely to go backwards, as I see it, to ideas that I see as old hat, tried and failed, etc.. In other words, I can be very open-minded to go beyond the box of my thinking, but to be asked to climb back into a more narrow box, is not likely to appeal to me.

Yes. Stuck. Got it.
[Note: I did actually change my siggy in part because of JB's song: Pray. I thought you might want to know that, FWIW.]

Great!

Originally Posted by The Rani

(((giggle)))
excellent point

People being asleep is our number one problem, at least as Americans. We are hooked on ideologies that we refuse to look at and which blind us to realities that we need to deal with very soon. So no, we should not be napping, even though the rhetoric on both sides may sound like someone hit the replay button.

Originally Posted by playwrite

There is not one national political leader in this country, regardless of party, that supports your view. Not one.

Even Ron Paul or Bernie Sanders, who have been most vocal in not only extracting ourselves from Afghanistan but most of our foreign bases, would NEVER say or believe what you have said about our troops being mercenaries, not being one of us.

Well, of course not. Soldiers are U.S. citizens for the most part and get to vote. What's more, they have families and friends who also have a vote. There are all kinds of things our politicians won't say for fear either of alienating voters or driving away campaign donors. That doesn't mean Justin isn't right.

I believe he has a point. Following the Vietnam War protests, we abandoned the draft and switched to an all-volunteer, professional military force. Now as poorly as the draft was administered in Vietnam, so that it became a system where the poor went to war and the rich got a pass, the basic idea was sound, and meant that we had a citizen military -- meaning that our soldiers were primarily something else in life and didn't pursue the military as a career in itself.

A professional military, though, rather than a citizen military, goes with the role of empire. It means our troops are more reliable and may be used for questionable purposes, since they signed up with their eyes open and none of them had to do so. It also means that the quality of soldiering goes up a bit -- our professional soldiers are better trained and have better morale today than the conscripts did in Vietnam.

There is something wrong with the way this is being done, and it is part and parcel with the wrongness of empire itself.

The RCP Average is now down to Obama +2.7, and dropping as I said it would. If you subtract the three old polls at the bottom still covering the DNC, you get this:

Obama: 47.6
Romney: 45.8

Margin: Obama +1.8
Undecided: 6.6

Expect those to be the numbers on the top line soon. Once again, the race remains as it has been. The majority of voters do not want to re-elect Obama, but there are still about 7% who aren't sold on Romney. The debates will likely be decisive, along with considerations about the economy and now the Middle East. If the economy does not somehow improve before the election (and there is little to no chance that it will), and if Romney performs capably in the debates, if I was a betting man I would bet heavily on Romney.

Originally Posted by playwrite

There is not one national political leader in this country, regardless of party, that supports your view. Not one.

Neither did Saddam Hussein. Non sequitor much?

(I notice you continue to avoid addressing the false claims you made. Not that I'm surprised or anything... just pointing it out...)

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

When [Justin] said "mercenaries" or language to that equivalent, I took him to mean soldiers in the regular U.S. military, who these days serve for pay, as a career, and are not like the citizen-soldiers of past wars.

Yeah, that. I checked with Teh Wikipedia, and it informs me that "mercenary" isn't exactly the right word for what I was trying to say. I'm sort of at a loss, though -- what would be the appropriate term for people who seek out work as professional contract-killers?

---
-edit-
Or 'enforcers', or whatever -- the main point is that they sought and engaged in a profession one of whose fundamental duties is the harming or killing of whoever-their-bosses-tell-them.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Yeah, that. I checked with Teh Wikipedia, and it informs me that "mercenary" isn't exactly the right word for what I was trying to say. I'm sort of at a loss, though -- what would be the appropriate term for people who seek out work as professional contract-killers?

The technically correct term is "professional soldiers." "Mercenaries" is true to the spirit of the phenomenon, but technically inaccurate because a mercenary company is not part of a country's regular military but is hired on a temporary basis, usually under its own commanders and operating independently of any codes of military justice the country may have.

In the American Revolutionary War, the Continental Army were citizen-soldiers, the Redcoats were professionals, and the Hessians were mercenaries. In ancient Rome, the pre-Marius legions were citizen soldiers, the post-Marius legions were professionals, and German bands hired on a temporary basis were mercenaries.

The main point is to distinguish our modern, professional army from the citizen-soldiers called for by the Constitution in the provisions relating to the militia, and engaged on a temporary basis even after we no longer employed a militia properly so called. Even after that, our professional army, although not nonexistent, remained small until quite recently. We recruited or drafted temporary military forces to fight the War of 1812, the Mexican War, the Civil War (on both sides), the Spanish-American War, World War I, and World War II, with the idea that we would dismiss these forces after the war was over so they could get on with their real lives (and thanks very much for serving your country). After World War II, we kept a larger military under arms, but we did it by recruiting and drafting military forces for a few years and then dismissing them to be replaced by others, hence retaining the concept of the citizen army. Only after Vietnam did we switch to a genuine professional army resembling the Redcoats or the post-Marius Roman legions. It's worth noting here that only after the Marian reforms did legions exist that would follow a charismatic commander such as Sulla or Caesar in battle against Rome itself. Professional soldiers may do that, if the commander is loved enough and if the government is disdained enough. Citizen-soldiers never will.

They're not mercenaries, but they share with mercenaries some of the most disagreeable qualities that mercenaries have. The military now constitutes a separate culture of its own. Soldiers are willing to obey orders to do things that would have generated protests from citizen soldiers and did generate protests (up to the point of fragging officers) from soldiers in Vietnam.

I don't think at present there's a general in the U.S. military that commands the kind of loyalty Sulla or Caesar did, but the possibility remains, especially as the government grows more and more corrupt, and especially when it seems to be trying to screw soldiers and veterans out of what was promised and what the military personnel are likely to see as their due. The chance of rebellion is a function of how much they love the commander, how much the government sucks, and how much they and the commander are getting screwed. (Which both Sulla and Caesar were just prior to their respective marches on Rome.)

Originally Posted by The Rani

Another intelligent and thoughtful post on these 4T forums.

You need to get your Internet feet wet. Dive on in, water's warm !!!

Sentence structure is sound, message is coherent, Justin has just pushed one of PW's buttons. Here is how the rest of the Internet thinks and talks (from the Diablo III forums):

[99% of the trolls on this forum] are 18 or Under, You can just tell.

The comebacks they use and going into every thread saying dumb shii.

Get out of here go lurk at your highschool and ask mommy for milk from her nipz.

I'm pretty sure that the second line isn't a full sentence. This is pretty much what pbrower2a goes on about here. I don't always agree with his elitist stuff, but he isn't wrong that there is a huge, festering cancer in our culture. Our kids sound like morons and they do it in public.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Uh, if you have to agree with the biases of the poster to find a post intelligent and thoughtful, it isn't.

Well...

When reading a JPT post, one has to assume the Bible is literally true, that an earnest study will give one the only correct interpretation, and that JPT has made such a study. I'm willing to grant he has made an impressive study. Given these assumptions, his posts are indeed intelligent and thoughtful. The problems arise if one cannot accept these premises in good grace. If one cannot, that line from Cool Hand Luke crops up. "What we have here is a failure to communicate."

When reading an Eric post, one has to assume that certain moral and philosophical questions may be answered reliably if one practices spiritualism, and that Eric has made such a study. His opinions on such matters are thus as solid as JPTs or the Pope when he is speaking ex cathedra, though JPT, Eric and the Pope do not always agree. If one is willing to suspend disbelief, to accept Eric's methods of seeking Truth and the earnestness with which he has pursued it, his posts are indeed intelligent and thoughtful. If one cannot, that line from Cool Hand Luke crops up. "What we have here is a failure to communicate."

When reading a Rani post, one has to assume PMS. If one is a liberal male, there is no possible apology that could possibly justify one's existence, no hope of a rational intelligent response. Just snarky contrariness for the sake of contrariness. Thus, that line from Cool Hand Luke crops up. "What we have here is a failure to communicate."

There are, of course, lots of political perspectives as well, red, blue, anarchist, libertarian, whatever. If one can buy into the premises, a lot of posters have done their homework and regularly put together intelligent thoughtful posts... assuming one can suspend disbelief long enough understand what they are trying to say. Thing is, suspension of disbelief is hard. If one is working within a particular system, the core premises of other systems generally seem wrong, disproven, evil, insane or whatever. Thus, that line from Cool Hand Luke crops up...

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Actually, the focus on swing states is misplaced (though I like to indulge in it too!). Since no-one but a moron or a sadly-deceived person or a fool would actually vote for Romney, Obama's re-election seems assured. The real question is his nationwide margin of victory. It must be large enough to carry out the tea party from congress on his coattails, or we get 4 more years of stalemate and inaction.

Yes Prince, I am being very cat-matic! Now the question is, are you and the rest of the american people going to be caught cat-napping?

Very catty of you, Eric. Share my tuna salad and milk?

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

The main point is to distinguish our modern, professional army from the citizen-soldiers called for by the Constitution in the provisions relating to the militia, and engaged on a temporary basis even after we no longer employed a militia properly so called. Even after that, our professional army, although not nonexistent, remained small until quite recently. We recruited or drafted temporary military forces to fight the War of 1812, the Mexican War, the Civil War (on both sides), the Spanish-American War, World War I, and World War II, with the idea that we would dismiss these forces after the war was over so they could get on with their real lives (and thanks very much for serving your country). After World War II, we kept a larger military under arms, but we did it by recruiting and drafting military forces for a few years and then dismissing them to be replaced by others, hence retaining the concept of the citizen army.

I'd note that our old pre World War II small professional armed forces were not entirely idle. Smedley Butler with his notion that War is a Racket spelled out how the US Marines were used to further the interests of United Fruit Company and similar capitalist imperialist interests. What we are doing today isn't entirely unprecedented, but it's on a larger scale than during the pre WW II era.

Then there were the Indian Wars.

I might agree that there ought to be words available other than citizen solder, militiaman or mercenary. Nothing to suggest. Perhaps just 'soldier' would be sufficient? I'm not sure I want to be judgmental of the rank and file. The politicians, sure, but not the rank and file.

Originally Posted by B Butler

I'd note that our old pre World War II small professional armed forces were not entirely idle.

I didn't say they were. What I did say was that they were small. As in, insufficient to fight a major war. We now maintain, or say we do, a military sufficient to fight two of them at once.

Originally Posted by B Butler

When reading a JPT post, one has to assume the Bible is literally true, that an earnest study will give one the only correct interpretation, and that JPT has made such a study. I'm willing to grant he has made an impressive study. Given these assumptions, his posts are indeed intelligent and thoughtful.

Since the assumption that the Bible is literally true is itself neither intelligent nor thoughtful, I must disagree that "given these assumption" it is even possible for any post of his to be such, unless it lies outside religious thought altogether where the Bible is not an issue.

Originally Posted by playwrite

You’re right to a degree. But you need to think it through more.

First, yes, he has helped solidified the Dems base and motivated it to get out the vote

Second, as I said, at least half of those in the 47% are Republicans. Yes, there is still the "What's the Matter with Kansas" problem of people like you voting against their own economic interest because they have been brainwashed now for several decades with GOP lies. But this Thurston Howell Romney bit must be weary some of you down. At least to the point of why vote. Let’s watch what those polls on voter enthusiasm say over the next couple weeks; the Dems have already met and surpassed what was once a clear GOP advantage here - I think it’s going to get worse for the GOP, a lot worse.

Third, and most importantly, the election is going to be decided by Independents and those people by a HUGE majority not only support the "government handouts" (SS, Medicare, Food Stamps, School lunch programs) but they also want to believe that America offers those who have fallen into the safety nets the potential to work their way out. Romney clearly said they can't and he doesn't care one way or the other if they do or if they don't - he has written them off. This is a killer in the Indy suburbs.

Fourth, this will not play well with retirees and to some extent those in the military. That is a killer in Florida and other key swing states where those sub-populations are key voting blocks.

Fifth, when coupled with the conventions outcome and the Libya misstep, this has brought utter chaos and dispiriting mood to the Team Romney and has completely demolished their attempt to control the message. The clock is ticking, in some states early voting has already started. Pretty hard to see how they can mitigate this downward spiral let alone turn it around – what possibly could they bring to the table in the next 50-something days that we haven’t already heard over and over again?

It’s over.

The ones who traditionally vote Republican have more interests in the market than the ones who vote Democrat based on my knowlege of the two groups. The ones who vote Democrat live primarily on Soc Sec and a relatively small company pension or part time job like my in laws and the bulk of their friends. The ones who vote Republican live on Soc Security and a equal or larger sum from their private investments and IRA's like my mother and the bulk of her elderly nieghbors and friends. BTW, the chances are likely that the elderly Republican voter pays federal taxes on their income and represent a portion of the 53% who pay taxes in America. My elderly uncle (a big govt lib, retired college professor) represents a portion of Americans who pay taxes as well and might be offended by Romney's analogy but he's already dedicated and willl be voting for Obama anyways.

Originally Posted by Brian Rush

Since the assumption that the Bible is literally true is itself neither intelligent nor thoughtful, I must disagree that "given these assumption" it is even possible for any post of his to be such, unless it lies outside religious thought altogether where the Bible is not an issue.

I almost never start a conversation or debate with the assumption that the other person's entire basis for opinion is wrong. I may eventually come to the conclusion that the person is unwilling to step outside that basis and that actual debate is impossible. This does frequently happen with JPT, but I don't think that it reflects on intellect or ability to think. Quite the contrary, there are many highly intelligent biblical inerrantist, starting with my favorite preacher, Charles Stanley. I disagree with him at times, but he has a remarkable ability to connect the dots in the Bible.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

PW wasn't suggesting that Justin talk politics, rather that he use a little of his mercenary baby-killer lingo. Based on personal expereience, I'm not sure that will go as well.

I'm sure you will understand this more than those clowns here who have never had (and thankfully for them, never will) the experience.

The one silver lining to the Ray-gun 'revolution' was the end of this baby killer meme. Up until then, my knuckles were often sore from attitude-adjusting my new-found friends on the Left. On my return, I soon went over to the ‘other side,’ but my new found friends learned pretty quickly what was taboo around me.

Finally, it got through to the Left that it was pointless to blame the knife for the gutting; it was who wielded the knife. Also, they began to understand that those who actually had the experience might be amendable to policies that ended or reduced the potential for more, particularly for the next generation (see Eisenhower). Duh. Also, one of the most powerful checks on the chicken hawk Right has been raising the issue of putting our troops in harms way without due cause - it took 9/11 to breakthrough that and a lot of outright lying by the worst of chicken hawks to come along in decades to keep it going long enough to invade Iraq.

So, as I noted, there are no national leaders today that embrace the baby killer meme. Hard to even find them at the local level except for various fringe groups - which is basically what we have here on this forum.

What's funny is under their isolationist or non-interventionist magic pony land, the desire to protect the homeland remains. It’s pretty hard to imagine either of these cowardly hypocrites manning the perimeter. What's funny is that you would think if their magic pony land came about these clowns might realize it would be better to have folks trained to rip you a new one 30 different ways to sunset inside their perimeter shooting out rather than outside shooting in. What's funny is that in the magic pony land they envision they wouldn't last a day. I guess that's why they hide out here in this country rather than have the guts to go anywhere near a place with the reality of what they profess they want. Here, they are free to be the cowardly hypocrites and shit on those who afford them that right.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Another intelligent and thoughtful post on these 4T forums.

Thanks for noting.

I know it's sincere because of the lack of your classic eyeroll.

Originally Posted by Aramea

I almost never start a conversation or debate with the assumption that the other person's entire basis for opinion is wrong. I may eventually come to the conclusion that the person is unwilling to step outside that basis and that actual debate is impossible. This does frequently happen with JPT, but I don't think that it reflects on intellect or ability to think. Quite the contrary, there are many highly intelligent biblical inerrantist, starting with my favorite preacher, Charles Stanley. I disagree with him at times, but he has a remarkable ability to connect the dots in the Bible.

It's possible for intelligent people to believe things that are not intelligent. It's also possible, with a resort to allegorical and metaphorical interpretations and a great deal of ingenuity, to believe that the Bible is inerrant. It is not, however, possible to believe that the Bible is literally true in every word without short-circuiting your critical faculties in order to arrive at that conclusion.

Anyone who believes this believes something that is manifestly untrue according to all available evidence. Such a person cannot be reasoned with on any subject where the Bible and empirical evidence conflict, or where a reasonable outcome-based and good done/harm done morality conflicts with the Bible's authoritarian moral premise. There is nothing to be said in answer except, "I reject the entire basis of your thinking and believe it is both incorrect and dangerous. None of the evidence you present, which comes from that book in your hand, is going to convince me of anything, and none of the evidence I present, which comes from observation of the real world, is going to convince you on the frequent occasions when the two conflict."

Where the person whose thinking has been warped in this fashion does possess a high native intelligence, and I admit that sometimes happens, I can only regard it as a tragic waste of a potentially great mind.

Originally Posted by playwrite

What's funny is under their isolationist or non-interventionist magic pony land, the desire to protect the homeland remains. It’s pretty hard to imagine either of these cowardly hypocrites manning the perimeter. What's funny is that you would think if their magic pony land came about these clowns might realize it would be better to have folks trained to rip you a new one 30 different ways to sunset inside their perimeter shooting out rather than outside shooting in. What's funny is that in the magic pony land they envision they wouldn't last a day. I guess that's why they hide out here in this country rather than have the guts to go anywhere near a place with the reality of what they profess they want. Here, they are free to be the cowardly hypocrites and shit on those who afford them that right.

This tendency extends to quite a few subjects. How many modern day "rugged individualists" would make it three days in a covered wagon headed "out west"? Survive Andersonville? It is always easy to pontificate in the safety of our comfortable homes. This isn't a left-right tendency, just a tendency to romanticize things that you have no experience in.

Originally Posted by playwrite

Finally, it got through to the Left that it was pointless to blame the knife for the gutting; it was who wielded the knife.

A knife is not a sentient, self-willed organism capable of making moral choices and being held accountable for them.

A soldier is.