By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Obama to resurrect military commissions for terror suspects

akuma587 on 15 May 2009

You act like there was one coherent vision of what the Founding Fathers wanted America to be. Do you really think they all agreed with each other and didn't squabble about everything when it got down to the details like we are right now? You are living in an illusion if you think the Founding Fathers all had the same vision about what the country would ultimately be. Why do you think the Constitution leaves so many details out? Because as soon as they started putting them down, they disagreed.

Frankly, I don't think the Founding Fathers had any idea what the future would really be like. How could they? They didn't even have electricity. They lived in a world where it took three months to get from England to America. Today, we can get there in about 8 hours. That alone would have made them shit themselves.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
TheRealMafoo on 15 May 2009
akuma587 said:

Frankly, I don't think the Founding Fathers had any idea what the future would really be like. How could they? They didn't even have electricity. They lived in a world where it took three months to get from England to America. Today, we can get there in about 8 hours. That alone would have made them shit themselves.

 

This is the biggest single difference between you and me. You think that somehow our technology has brought the world to some level incomprehensible to people 300 years ago.

People are no different today than they were back then. Not only could our forefather have an idea of what we would become, they predicted it with laser accuracy.

This statement is as true today, as it was when John Adams said it:

While all other sciences have advanced, that of government is at a standstill - little better understood, little better practiced now than three or four thousand years ago. - John Adams



Legend11 on 15 May 2009

I think everyone that is imprisoned and accused of something deserves a fair trial. I'm sure if there were 200 Americans imprisoned in another country indefinitely and that country was going out of its way to strip those people of the same rights they give their own citizens we'd have a lot of outraged people. It's sad to see an America blinded by hate and eschewing the very values it claims to stand for.



highwaystar101 on 15 May 2009
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:

I don't think I have heard you say one positive thing about Obama.

 

  • He is well spoken
  • He is well mannered
  • He is very intelligent
  • He has a good sense of humor
  • He cares about America, and the people who live in it
  • His views on personal rights often times are in line with mine

How’s that?

I do not have an “unhealthy obsession with criticizing Obama”, I just want the America our forefathers envisioned back. The country that people used to love, and the world envied. No president in my lifetime has worked towards that goal. All of them were power hungry, and thought governments job was to control its people. Not to just protect them.

Aside from Ron Paul, I would be equally critical about the other 20 people who ran for office against Obama.

I think you are going to need a third political party there. Neither the democrats or the republicans will do this.

 



TheRealMafoo on 15 May 2009
highwaystar101 said:

I think you are going to need a third political party there. Neither the democrats or the republicans will do this.

 

 

I know. It's why I am not a fan of either. I am a Libertarian.



Around the Network
akuma587 on 15 May 2009
TheRealMafoo said:
akuma587 said:

Frankly, I don't think the Founding Fathers had any idea what the future would really be like. How could they? They didn't even have electricity. They lived in a world where it took three months to get from England to America. Today, we can get there in about 8 hours. That alone would have made them shit themselves.

 

This is the biggest single difference between you and me. You think that somehow our technology has brought the world to some level incomprehensible to people 300 years ago.

People are no different today than they were back then. Not only could our forefather have an idea of what we would become, they predicted it with laser accuracy.

This statement is as true today, as it was when John Adams said it:

While all other sciences have advanced, that of government is at a standstill - little better understood, little better practiced now than three or four thousand years ago. - John Adams

You are right, but most of your complaints revolve around the government's relationship to the economy.  Sure, government hasn't changed, but can you honestly tell me that the economy has not changed?  Why should the relationship between the two stay the same when one of them has changed?  Why should we subscribe to economic philosophy that was prevalent when people still road horses and buggies?  Economics is not government.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

TheRealMafoo on 15 May 2009
akuma587 said:

You are right, but most of your complaints revolve around the government's relationship to the economy.  Sure, government hasn't changed, but can you honestly tell me that the economy has not changed?  Why should the relationship between the two stay the same when one of them has changed?  Why should we subscribe to economic philosophy that was prevalent when people still road horses and buggies?  Economics is not government.

 

No, just most of my complaints that we argue about. We are on the same side in the abortion thread, and right now, I have nothing to complain about. Abortion laws are in line with my views.

And the only thing I argue about with economy is based on one basic view.

It is against what this country stands for, to take money from one group of people, for the sole purpose of giving it to another.

The other aspect of government that I always complain about is the centralization of power.

Government in the beginning was supposed to be small. It was there to protect your liberties, not to run your life. Government was not something people looked at to solve problems. Today it’s almost the only place they look.

When government does something to acquire more power over its people, or take more money to redistribute, you can find me arguing about it. Sadly, that’s about all they ever do.