...hmmm - posts are disappearing
Printable View
...hmmm - posts are disappearing
Booners, I will take Ant's side here. The entire history of humanity is painted in shades of gray. There are certainly some events and persons in history that one can point to and say that was pure evil or pure good.
However, rarely are political judgments afforded the luxury by historians of being classed as pure evil or pure good. No, it's always a mix, always open to interpretation by various points of view, and never black and white.
Well, that's the difference between a New Testament & Old Testament type of guy, I guess. I happen to lean towards the latter...Quote:
Originally Posted by chinthee
Well your subjective moral judgment and relativism doesn't apply to me. And that's the entire point, what's evil to you is 'good and just' to others. Insisting that your values apply is fatuous, perhaps 'evil' too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
And the killing of civilians but the Allies? Various other atrosities, the fire-bombing of Dresden for one, dropping atomic weapons another. These are all 'good' things because a notional and arbitrary ideal of 'good and evil' dictates that they must be?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
I give to you as another example Oliver North who I see you've mentioned again in another thread - to you he's 'good' because of this role in the hostage situation. To others he's 'evil' because of his deceit and roles in illegal gun and drug trades. What makes you right and others wrong.
No need for ad hominem, Booners.Quote:
Perhaps you should go back to school and take a Civics course, ant...
We're getting way-off topic here but I'll throw up one more example of 'good'/'evil': NAMBLA = North American Man Boy Love Association. I present to you that this organization is 'evil' in that dirty old men are protected by the ACLU to solicit physical relations with young boys.
One more: The infamous 'Axis of Evil' describing Iran, Iraq & North Korea captured the essence of those countries at that time.
It might be OK for some academic sitting in his Ivory Tower to pontificate on these 'shades of gray' but in the so-called 'real' world, it don't work that way...:rolleyes:
That's just catergorically untrue Booners. The ACLU have protected NAMBLA for no such reasons. Entirely disingenuous I'm afraid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
A phrase that Bush used in a speech only 'captures the essence' of those nations by another bit of moral relativism. It's not the essence of those countries anymore than the US is the essence of what a speech-writer in Pyongyang or a Mullah in Iran says it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
The real world is nothing but shades of grey. Black and white simply doesn't apply. There's no way you can address any of those examples I listed about without recourse to your own subjective judgments which, by your own admission, are very 'Old Testament'. So how do your 'Old Testament' values and judgments apply to others?Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
Let's wait for Tuesday, shall we?
Ya, Boonie, that Coulter call is unbelievable. Holy smokerama. What, would she vote for Romney? Face it, we don't have a good elephant in this campaign.:(
^Jet, that's why I said I'd even go to the other side for Obama. The Republicans are imploding.
Romney is absolutely unelectable as a Mormon.
McCain is a tired old man and mostly democrat anyway.
Why not put new blood in the white house? I mean, he'll always be held in check by Congress and the Supreme Court. Might be just the injection of fresh blood America needs.
^ I hear you. He has the star qualities to do it. It will be an interesting term if he does. If, he lives to see it.
Why has the ACLU protected NAMBLA then?Quote:
Originally Posted by AntRobertson
So-called 'Free Speech'?
is America more ready for a woman as President than a black man as a President ?
McCain a democrat ? that's an insult to democrats, he is just a senile old man, might as well keep Bush for a third term,
Now we're talking!Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterfly
Knew you'd come to your senses!:)
Wrong on two points:Quote:
Originally Posted by Butterfly
1. McCain supports same sex marriage, stem cell research and other Democratic party issues. He's not a democrat. It's not an insult to Democrats. He's not a Republican, either. Both are good points - even though I don't like McCain.
2. Might as well keep Bush for a 3rd term? You don't know how different they both are on many pieces of legislation, policy, and political philosophy.
Only 3 days left to save the Republic...:confused:
YouTube - Coulter: No, I'm not kidding about backing Hillary
^ fucking A
two birds with one stone, after supporting Hillary, her minions will never forgive her :)
I saw the youtube of Coulter, with Hannity and (Combs?)
These political talk shows cater to the unsophisticated zombies who are functionally illiterate.
All three people mentioned above are buffoons and polemicists.
Three reasons to vote for Obama.
Kinda make sense to me except for the fact he's just another tax & spend liberal Democrat...:rolleyes:
Irish Trojan in Tennessee:Three reasons to vote for Obama
Don't you think that's a little out-moded.Quote:
Originally Posted by Boon Mee
Yes, the old term of "tax and spend liberal Democrat" becamse outdated over 2 decades ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by AntRobertson
Bill Clinton killed it off for good by his "pay as you go fiscal policies," and he dropped many traditional Liberal policies after 1994. Liberals don't like Bill Clinton.
I don't think Obama is tax.
I don't think Obama is spend.
I don't think Obama is liberal.
Look at his voting record.
And, with GWB's fiscal policies, the GOP is now the party of spend, spend, spend.
"Deficits don't matter." -- Dick Cheney.
The interest on the national debt must be paid. And it costs more than the war in Iraq.
CBS delegate scorecard -- mmm, California should be in but no tally yet. This site updates continuously.
Election Results - CBSNews.com
Clinton and Obama pretty much neck and neck in California.
49% TO 48% representing no more than about a thousand votes.
Mrs Bill narrowly ahead.
The biggest Spanish language dialy endorced Obama this could help him win the votes of Latinos in LA SF and with that the whole of California. So far Obama hasn't polled well among Latinos probably for rather... base reasons. O Winfery is on board she really is one of the most powerful people in America. Mc Cain looks old and confused ...the continued talk of the red peril makes you wonder which century he is living in.
After watching the latest speeches, i have decided to endorse Obama too.
:)
have to say that the choices are better for the Dems than Edwards and kerry.
CNN has projected Clinton win in California. Looks like delegates will be split fairly even so Hillary may have bragging rights of winning but will not get big edge in delegates.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiangMai noon
You have republicans saying they would much much rather they were facing Clinton in the election.
why then, don't democrats take the longer term view and all vote Obama??